FINALLY AAPA is starting to get it

[ventana]

This has been posted in other posts, but it seems to be good enough to deserve its own thread

 

 

http://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?322625-6%2Fwashington-journal-john-mcginnity-role-physician-assistants

 

 

[DiggySRNA]

Heart warming and funny when the heart failure patient said "I'm going to add a letter - my PA is a PA-C, and I wouldn't have made it this far without her." He said that loud and proud haha.

 

Thanks for the video...makes me feel safe that investing in this profession is a good idea.

[KMD16]

Excellent!

[Guest Paula]

Really nice job of promoting the PA profession. 

[mashlee]

This is great! I hope this leads to future interviews, he's a great advocate and spokesman for PAs.

[True Anomaly]

Good video. I especially like how McGinnity was able to dodge the utter nonsense/babbling questions from the first non-PA caller from Richmond who seemed to only want to hear himself on TV- McGinnity kept the focus back on PA's practicing in a collaborative environment.

 

This also reminded me how much I hate caller-based radio/TV programs

[db_pavnp]

A little surprised at the 3.7 GPA figure.

[burnpac]

Excellent Job by President McGinnity. Actually, the AAPA has gotten it all along. You don't just flip the switch when it comes to media exposure. The past couple of years is the fruition of decades of ground work in the area of PA PR by the AAPA, and the critical mass of the profession. More, positive PA press to come.

[Boatswain2PA]

Outstanding job! He did a great job laying out who we are and what we do, and talked about some of our problems while not rising up to bash on some of the lesser trained providers.

[ventana]

Excellent Job by President McGinnity. Actually, the AAPA has gotten it all along. You don't just flip the switch when it comes to media exposure. The past couple of years is the fruition of decades of ground work in the area of PA PR by the AAPA, and the critical mass of the profession. More, positive PA press to come.

 

 

gotta agree to disagree with you on that

 

they JUST RECENTLY started to refer to us as PAs

 

They have been missing the mark for years, but they are doing a reasonable job now, and I truly hope it gets better and stays that way - we need AAPA to lead the profession in to the future!

[burnpac]

gotta agree to disagree with you on that

 

they JUST RECENTLY started to refer to us as PAs

 

They have been missing the mark for years, but they are doing a reasonable job now, and I truly hope it gets better and stays that way - we need AAPA to lead the profession in to the future!

Ventana,

 

If your only criteria for messaging success is referencing physician assistants as "PAs", then I understand why you feel the way in which you do.

 

Things like the C-Span interview don't just occur in a vacuum. Having worked in both leadership and as a media spokesperson at a variety of levels, I know first hand how much gritty, behind the scenes ground work that it takes to get to this point.  Your mileage may vary....

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

Ventana,

 

If you only criteria for messaging success is referencing physician assistants as "PAs", then I understand why you feel the way in which you do.

 

Things like the C-Span interview don't just occur in a vacuum. Having worked in both leadership and as a media spokesperson at a variety of levels, I know first hand how much gritty, behind the scenes ground work that it takes to get to this point. Your mileage may vary....

I think what ventana means is they are actually saying the right things now, not that they just got a cspan interview. Anybody remember the terrible NPR interview, about a year ago I believe? Maybe it was 2. It made us look like we needed hand holding through every step of dealing with a patient, meanwhile the NP made a strong case why they are the answer to the physician shortage.

[burnpac]

I think what ventana means is they are actually saying the right things now, not that they just got a cspan interview. Anybody remember the terrible NPR interview, about a year ago I believe? Maybe it was 2. It made us look like we needed hand holding through every step of dealing with a patient, meanwhile the NP made a strong case why they are the answer to the physician shortage.

I think that the title of this thread affected my interpretation of what Ventana was saying, however, I will give Ventana the benefit of the doubt on this. My frustration stems from what I see as a significant disconnect by some on this Forum between expectations, and the cold hard realities of the environment in which the profession struggles for recognition. Just because the desired result is not achieved, doesn't mean that the effort at meaningful change is not present. Credit needs to be given where credit is due.

[Planteater]

Great interview! Way to go Mr. McGinnity and the PAs who called in!

[ventana]

I think that the title of this thread affected my interpretation of what Ventana was saying, however, I will give Ventana the benefit of the doubt on this. My frustration stems from what I see as a significant disconnect by some on this Forum between expectations, and the cold hard realities of the environment in which the profession struggles for recognition. Just because the desired result is not achieved, doesn't mean that the effort at meaningful change is not present. Credit needs to be given where credit is due.

 

 

Sorry but I am about to hijack this thread....  

 

 

I think AAPA is doing well right now

 

BUT

 

in the past they have not - they, for what ever reason, dropped the ball for a number of years.  I know that you are a past director or somehow are/were affiliated with AAPA and I would suggest that this might have clouded your perception.

 

A few things that come to mind that are HUGE for ALL

 

1- no hitech recognition - yup that cost every single PA (and or their employer) $44,000 - on this topic alone I feel the entire senior management of AAPA should have been FIRED.  You just do not let something like this get by with out PAs being included

2 - The inability for PA to provide hospice care - NPs can

3- the inability for PAs to order VNA care

4 - it was only very recently that PA got prescribing rights in all 50 states

5 - I don't remember the details but there was a horrible mess in Tx a few years ago where AAPA sided on the wrong side

6-I got tired of stupid warm fuzzy stories on the AAPA feeds, instead of printing and going after the prize (the above issues) they were focusing on soft fuzzy stories that had no reflection on the advancement of our profession

7-continued lack of any type of national promotion beyond PA day (wuuppeee!)  Seriously, it is time to do something....

8-and my favotire - the AAPA killing the name change proposal to even look into a name change with out even ever looking at it.  In speaking to friends that were there it was a very organized, pre planned attack to disregard the 6000+ PAs who had signed the petition.  This was not to change the name, just to merely set up a committee to look into it.  If 6000 PAs put their name on something that in itself should just about MANDATE it being looked at.

 

 

These are just a few examples over the past 10 years where AAPA has collectively FAILED in my opinion.  BUT  I have joined, sent in extra money for the PAC and see that they are turning a corner right now.  This is a good thing as I suspect that we will never again see such a dynamic period of change in our nation in regards to health care delivery.

 

 

 

A final note - and this is a great example of short shortsightedness.  In my state there was a great bill passed in 2012 which broke out and advanced 5 of the 6 points of PA practice.  I thought it was a great accomplishment till I saw what the NPs had in the same bill.  A single line  "NPs may sign anything that a physician may sign"    They have used this single line to tear down barriers which have existed for years.  That is forethought and planning! 

 

 

 

We have disagreed before and I am likely in vocal minority, which I think has turned into the majority. I feel AAPA staffers likely got complacent and forgot that they are to advance the PA profession as much as possible.  

 

 

I do not think it is a disconnect on how hard it is to get things through (see above example of how much more effective the NP lobby was in my state by putting a single line in a bill then what PAs had)

It is about being assertive, never saying never, continuing to push, continuing to advance, not taking NO for an answer.  I have never once gotten a specific solicitation from AAPA for going after one item like a bull dog - i.e. donate to our campaign to overturn the VNA rules, or the Hospice rules.  But instead just 'give us money' emails.  

 

Make a battle plan, go after it, get some skin in the game like the PAs on the front lines have.  Have the same passion and drive that the PAs that are caring for their patients have, drive, motivation, never giving up.   This is what the AAPA needs, not a bunch of non PAs who are okay with simply doing enough to get by.

 

 

 

I challenge AAPA to resolve the issues in the following 2 years and I will donate an extra $1000 for it when successful

1) Allow PAs to order/certify VNA and Hospice

2) get PAs eligible for HiTech (not just RHC PAs but ALL PA's)

 

If you can get the next two to pass I will donate another $1500

3) remove Medicares requirement for 1% co-ownership by someone else for practice ownership

4) allow PAs to direct bill

 

Icing on the cake- and I will donate another $1000

5) Allow PAs to prescribe Sch II after 2 years with out oversight/cosign/notification from Docs in all 50 states.  Granted this is a state level issue and much harder to attain but we need to move forward.

 

 

 

I am very serious about the above issues and am happy to see the AAPA finally moving forward (At the prodding of groups like PAFT and truly visionary leaders that have emerged, but this does not forgive past errors!)

[burnpac]

Sorry but I am about to hijack this thread....  

 

 

I think AAPA is doing well right now

 

BUT

 

in the past they have not - they, for what ever reason, dropped the ball for a number of years.  I know that you are a past director or somehow are/were affiliated with AAPA and I would suggest that this might have clouded your perception.

 

A few things that come to mind that are HUGE for ALL

 

1- no hitech recognition - yup that cost every single PA (and or their employer) $44,000 - on this topic alone I feel the entire senior management of AAPA should have been FIRED.  You just do not let something like this get by with out PAs being included

2 - The inability for PA to provide hospice care - NPs can

3- the inability for PAs to order VNA care

4 - it was only very recently that PA got prescribing rights in all 50 states

5 - I don't remember the details but there was a horrible mess in Tx a few years ago where AAPA sided on the wrong side

6-I got tired of stupid warm fuzzy stories on the AAPA feeds, instead of printing and going after the prize (the above issues) they were focusing on soft fuzzy stories that had no reflection on the advancement of our profession

7-continued lack of any type of national promotion beyond PA day (wuuppeee!)  Seriously, it is time to do something....

8-and my favotire - the AAPA killing the name change proposal to even look into a name change with out even ever looking at it.  In speaking to friends that were there it was a very organized, pre planned attack to disregard the 6000+ PAs who had signed the petition.  This was not to change the name, just to merely set up a committee to look into it.  If 6000 PAs put their name on something that in itself should just about MANDATE it being looked at.

 

 

These are just a few examples over the past 10 years where AAPA has collectively FAILED in my opinion.  BUT  I have joined, sent in extra money for the PAC and see that they are turning a corner right now.  This is a good thing as I suspect that we will never again see such a dynamic period of change in our nation in regards to health care delivery.

 

 

 

A final note - and this is a great example of short shortsightedness.  In my state there was a great bill passed in 2012 which broke out and advanced 5 of the 6 points of PA practice.  I thought it was a great accomplishment till I saw what the NPs had in the same bill.  A single line  "NPs may sign anything that a physician may sign"    They have used this single line to tear down barriers which have existed for years.  That is forethought and planning! 

 

 

 

We have disagreed before and I am likely in vocal minority, which I think has turned into the majority. I feel AAPA staffers likely got complacent and forgot that they are to advance the PA profession as much as possible.  

 

 

I do not think it is a disconnect on how hard it is to get things through (see above example of how much more effective the NP lobby was in my state by putting a single line in a bill then what PAs had)

It is about being assertive, never saying never, continuing to push, continuing to advance, not taking NO for an answer.  I have never once gotten a specific solicitation from AAPA for going after one item like a bull dog - i.e. donate to our campaign to overturn the VNA rules, or the Hospice rules.  But instead just 'give us money' emails.  

 

Make a battle plan, go after it, get some skin in the game like the PAs on the front lines have.  Have the same passion and drive that the PAs that are caring for their patients have, drive, motivation, never giving up.   This is what the AAPA needs, not a bunch of non PAs who are okay with simply doing enough to get by.

 

 

 

I challenge AAPA to resolve the issues in the following 2 years and I will donate an extra $1000 for it when successful

1) Allow PAs to order/certify VNA and Hospice

2) get PAs eligible for HiTech (not just RHC PAs but ALL PA's)

 

If you can get the next two to pass I will donate another $1500

3) remove Medicares requirement for 1% co-ownership by someone else for practice ownership

4) allow PAs to direct bill

 

Icing on the cake- and I will donate another $1000

5) Allow PAs to prescribe Sch II after 2 years with out oversight/cosign/notification from Docs in all 50 states.  Granted this is a state level issue and much harder to attain but we need to move forward.

 

 

 

I am very serious about the above issues and am happy to see the AAPA finally moving forward (At the prodding of groups like PAFT and truly visionary leaders that have emerged, but this does not forgive past errors!)

Ventana,

 

I am also very serious about the above issues. You keep using the example of how effective is the NP lobby, and how we should be more like them. I agree with you. I'm interested in how you propose we accomplish this considering that there are nearly 3 million nurses in the US, compared to 100,00 PAs? Your expectations and comparisons are unrealistic in the present political environment.  The AAPA didn't just start to change, it has been changing throughout the 40 plus years of its existence, and has many, many significant milestones/successes in improving PA practice, recognition, and reimbursement. It didn't just happen because the PAFT forced them to.You can have your own perception of events, but you can't rewrite history.

 

There have been many failures to get important things done by the AAPA, and it has been a painful reality. But it has not been for lack of trying. I suspect that you have never worked in government affairs, but it has been my long experience working in local, state and national GA that you don't ever, get all of what you want with legislation.

 

I began practice in CA (1982) when there were NO states allowing PA prescribing, physicians had to be onsite, and every chart reviewed and countersigned, among many other restrictions. We got our prescribing bill in '95 despite vociferous and determined opposition by the nurses. It was then almost rendered useless by the pharm board. Every state, with the help of the AAPA, has successfully fought this battle against overwhelming odds and entrenched nursing and medical lobbies, and you are complaining that it took too long? How would you have done it differently?

 

And yes, I have been at the table at times through the nineties and into the 2000s, making very tough choices and decisions with limited money and finite resources. I doubt very seriously that anyone on this Forum or in this profession would have made different decisions using the same set of facts and realities.

 

You think PR is just the "warm and fuzzy stories" that are public. You don't see the media staff at the AAPA along with leaders working tirelessly behind the scenes with reporters and producers over the decades to make the present reality of PA PR more substantive and prominent. This didn't just occur in a vacuum. In the past PAs just weren't large enough or important enough as a profession to get much attention, no matter what we did. That has all changed now thanks to the growth of the profession, and the work of the AAPA.

 

I'm very thankful and glad that you and others, despite our differences, opinions and perceptions, are members and supporting the AAPA. We either stand together as a profession, or hang separately.

 

However, you are right. We will just have to agree to disagree.

[gbrothers98]

And I will hijack this back......

 

Excellent points from both of you.

Definitely a need for pounding the table for change.

Also a need to work consistently within the process.

Not only are we at a critical juncture in healthcare history, but the PA profession is reaching critical mass. 

The demographics of the profession are younger and I hope will lend to more involvement.

Some of you may be leery of the new generation of PAs but they will outnumber all that came before soon and our future is in their hands.

 

There also is a debt owed to those whom have gotten the profession to this point, both through overt involvement in legislative improvements and in just showing up daily and getting down to business. You have regularly eaten a sh&t sandwich and we should have nothing but gratitude for that.

Not only do I have high hopes but great expectations over the rest of my career concerning the improvement in our practice environment.

 

To do so needs involvement from all. 

 

Please start locally and join your state society at least, preferably include your specialty society and the AAPA. Many of you may already may be able to through contract benefits and just havent taken the time. If not, consider negotiating this at year's end.

As pointed out above, resources can be limited. If you do join the AAPA, consider donating to the AAPA PAC.

100k PAs @ $10 per month is $12 million. Half or even a quarter of that would work wonders.

Money = a seat at the table and involvement in decisions that trickle down and affect all our professional lives.

 

We need that seat.

 

G Brothers PA-C

[burnpac]

As an addendum, My statement on prescriptive authority above was not accurate. In 1980 there were ten states with prescriptive authority in the US. By 1990, that had expanded to 30 states. All 50 states and DC and Guam achieved PA prescribing privileges by 2008.

 

This is an interesting read: History of the AAPA.

[LKPAC]

That history has been washed, I think.  The original name of our profession was "physican associate."  AAPA was originally Anerican Academy of Physician Associates.  Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

[burnpac]

This is an interesting tidbit of history.

 

The AAPA incorporated in NC in '68 as "assistant."

In '71, the corporation name was changed to "associate."

In '73, it was changed back to "assistant."

 

I have no clue as to the history of this.

 

The other changes in the name of the corporation had to do with various uses of apostrophes that we don't like.

 

Read all the historical corporate filings here. It is public record.

[LKPAC]

Thank you for that history.  The reasons behind that change would be interesting to know.

[burnpac]

Thank you for that history.  The reasons behind that change would be interesting to know.

I would like to know too. I don't think that we will ever know, as I'm not sure if any of the PAs from that era are still alive.

[EMEDPA]

I would like to know too. I don't think that we will ever know, as I'm not sure if any of the PAs from that era are still alive.

a few guys from Duke class 1 are still alive(or were as of last year).

They are PAFT members.

[LKPAC]

I think the change from associate to assistant in the 70's had to do with objections from physician groups.  I've often wondered if we made a "deal" with them.  Change to name to assistant for their "support."  I have heard this story, but have no proof.

[EMEDPA]

I think the change from associate to assistant in the 70's had to do with objections from physician groups.  I've often wondered if we made a "deal" with them.  Change to name to assistant for their "support." 

so when do we get their support?