why do you think that the rest of the public (most not knowing what we do!) would want to be on equipment in hospitals that, is able to be adjusted by unregulated professionals?
If I may offer a comment here: I came into Biomedical Engineering in 2010 after working for over 30 years in Marine Electronics. The grandfather arrangements that existed with VRCT precluded my joining the register and I am not inclined to undergo the current available route. I have a perfectly good engineering degree thank you very much and I fail to see what benefits the VRCT suggested route would have for me or my employers.
I should point out that the equipment manufacturers are perfectly happy with my performance at their training courses and with my subsequent work at the front-line.
As a non-VRCT member of staff I frequently have to correct the cock-ups committed by people who are VRCT-acredited.
I contend that there are several ways of skinning a cat and I also maintain that I am not 'clinical'. I do not touch patients, alive or dead. However I do come into contact with equipment of all descriptions and that is where my background comes in very handy.
I note that on another thread Mr Methven stated that aeronautical engineers would not be suitable for VRCT. Why not? The rigour demanded in aviation is just as great as in medical equipment. Similarly, speaking about my own case, being responsible for the well-being of fishing boats, cargo ships, passenger ferries and even on occasion Royal Navy ships provides an excellent framework for working in the hospital environment.
I know that several biomeds working for the large medical equipment manufacturers are not aligned to the VRCT. Are hospitals going to ban equipment manufacturer employees from their premises? I think not.
In short, VRCT appears to be badly thought-out and this Alliance for Patient Safety has even less credibility.
