TAPA makes some "weak tea" moves during the crisis

[sas5814]

I received the folllowing from TAPA today:

Hello TAPA Members - 

As you are more than likely aware of, the TAPA Board of Directors sent a letter to Governor Greg Abbott a couple of days ago asking him to lessen restrictions on PAs in Texas. We are pleased to announce that yesterday, Governor Abbott has temporarily waived certain regulations to expand the health care workforce to assist with Texas' COVID-19 response.  

Although there is mention on the Governor's Website, TAPA expects a formal announcement by the Governor soon regarding the waiver of restrictive supervising requirements during COVID-19:

• PAs will not have to formally designate to the Texas Medical Board whom their SP is/will be
  It will be a verbal agreement and can be any Physician in good standing. This will allow PAs to move around to other areas of medicine without hassle (Medical Director of Hospitals could be SP for the PAs going into these facilities to help during the crisis)
• There will be no limit as to how many PAs or NPs an SP can supervise. (Formerly in Texas this was 7 total)
• There will not be a requirement for written delegation of prescriptive authority (standard of care should still be met)
• Students that only lack the PANCE as the final step of licensure will be granted temporary licenses

Additionally, the following changes have been implemented since the emergency declaration on March 13, 2020: 

• Telemedicine unrestricted (Source)
• PAs can volunteer without a Supervising Physician. If you would like to volunteer, follow this link.
• Retired PAs can return to active status (Source) 

TAPA continues to monitor this situation closely as things evolve and will be in direct contact with the Governor’s office if there continue to be statutes and regulations that do not allow PAs to be at the forefront of this fight. Updates regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and the effect it has on PAs can be found on our website.

TAPA would like to thank the Governor, the Texas Medical Board, the Texas PA Board, as well as all of our allies in the legislature for their unwavering support and knowledge that PAs are a part of the solution during these unprecedented times of the COVID-19 crisis.

Sincerely, 

 

TAPA Board of Directors

 

 

So while many states are making bold, aggressive moves to eliminate supervision and move the profession forward TAPA has, once again, demonstrated its inability to imagine a world without supervision. Someday, when the NPs have independent practice in Texas, and we are all unemployed that will lay on the shoulder of every leader TAPA has had for the last 15 years.

I have very solid reasons to believe TAPA has no intention of pursuing OTP. This affirms that. If they can't make a bold move now then they are incapable.

I've been angry with them for too long. Now I'm just sad for us.

 

 

 

 

 

[Cideous]

These changes would be decent for a non-emergency but are weak sauce as my son says, for an emergency like this.

 

My favorite part is:  PAs can volunteer without a Supervising Physician. If you would like to volunteer

What in the hell?  So if you are getting paid you need a supervising physician but if you work for free you don't?  How is this about patient care and not politics Texas?

 

This state....

[True Anomaly]

Other than the word “supervision”, what about this is not exactly what OTP is at the very heart of it?  Team-based practice, decided at the practice site, without the need for unnecessary government red tape?  

Or are people upset because it’s not a complete break from doctors period, and therefore nothing was going to satisfy other than total independence?

They could’ve done nothing at all and sat on their hands.  Let’s at least acknowledge SOME movement in the right direction, even if it’s not exactly what you wanted ideally

[deltawave]

42 minutes ago, True Anomaly said:

Other than the word “supervision”, what about this is not exactly what OTP is at the very heart of it?  Team-based practice, decided at the practice site, without the need for unnecessary government red tape?  

Or are people upset because it’s not a complete break from doctors period, and therefore nothing was going to satisfy other than total independence?

They could’ve done nothing at all and sat on their hands.  Let’s at least acknowledge SOME movement in the right direction, even if it’s not exactly what you wanted ideally

I’m with this. Why the shade? 
 

“Temporary” gives opportunities for “permanent,” and also a leg to stand on when this comes to a close. “Look back, we were able to do our work more efficiently to help more patients without those restrictions.” 

[Bohuntr]

This is all great news, however, and I hate to dampen the mood of this progress, how long will it be before David Fleeger has a tantrum and tries to reverse progress?