As a former board member and trustee of Parker College, I cannot believe what has and is happening to "Dr. Jim." I served on the board with three of the present members.
History speaks volumes on our success. All this time Dr. Jim continued to lead the PSPS, PCRF and SHARE. The energy of this man is incredible. "Is" is the key word. He is able to lead Parker College until 2000 when his contract expires. He is the most positive force in chiropractic today. His is mentor to thousands of chiropractors who now are enjoying the fruits of their labors that were enhanced by Dr. Jim and his teachers.
If the board cannot live with Dr. Jim's leadership, they should resign. Without Dr. Jim they would be only another name in chiropractic; soon forgotten as their flesh and bones return to dust. Dr. Jim's name will live forever.
There is no doubt Dr. Karl is able and capable to lead chiropractic and Parker College. His plate is full already. When the time comes, he is the most able choice to lead Parker College, and no doubt will continue the fine tradition set by his dad, Dr. Jim. His time is coming. Dr. Jim's time is still now. He is able, willing and ready to continue to devote his life to chiropractic. The profession cannot see the remaining years of this chiropractic giant wasted.
SHARE, PCRF, and PSPS are owned by the college and under direct supervision of the board of trustees. Out of college could mean out of the PSPS seminars for Dr. Jim. As one person who has benefited so much personally and professionally form Dr. Jim, this is inconceivable. What has the board done for you? What has Dr. Jim done for you? You know the answer. Support Dr. Jim, and wish the board well as they resign and are replaced.
Charles E. Peele, DC
Oakland Park, Florida
Art for Art's Sake
I always look forward to reading my copy of Dynamic Chiropractic for its interesting news stories and thought provoking commentary, but lately I have first and foremost been attracted to the clever artwork on the front page header. As an admirer of Mondrian, I particularly liked that cover (April 7, 1997). I compliment the creators of this art for their inventiveness, and suggest that such good work ought to get more exposure. Perhaps you could do a little story on the illustrations, the illustrators and their significance for the publication and the profession. I for one would like to see the art again.
Thank you for all your good work for chiropractic and the public.
Meredith Gonyea, PhD
President
Center for Studies in Health Policy, Inc.
Washington, DC
Managed Care Whims
Dear Editor:
Managed chiropractic/medical care is a gift and a curse. The gift is that chiropractic has probably never been so recognized, accepted and available. The curse is that we are no longer self-employed. In fact, we are at the "whims" of our new employer. I personally would like to file a class-action suit against one managed care program that terminated my contract, of course citing that they did not need to give me a reason (for all I know, they may have the wrong person). I doubt that I am alone.
C.M. Wilkerson, DC
Carson, California
E-mail:
"... spend less time worrying about who's right and more time deciding what's right"
Dear Editor:
Dr. Sigmund Miller provides a most interesting article and explanation of the utilization review process ("Physical Medicine Utilization Review," Dynamic Chiropractic, Calif. Forum, March 24, 1997). It should be made available to all DCs, not just the California group. (Editor's note: We agree. Dr. Sigmund Miller's article will be appearing in other regional forums in the near future.)
Like most of the profession, I do not like the utilization review process, and am frustrated with it. It is most difficult to cope with the realization that, while most of us exercise sound clinical judgment, the few who have abused the system for so long bring a cloud of suspicion and a lack of clarity about how we in chiropractic manage patients.
However, Dr. Miller's excellent article shed some light, and indeed some hope that there is a future within the constraints of managed care. In particular, I was impressed with his statement: "In closing, debating whether utilization review is appropriate is irrelevant. It is important to spend less time worrying about who's right and more time deciding what's right."
Bravo!
As I have watched the Internet develop, and the online discussion lists which are becoming more and more popular each week, I see clearly the confusion and frustration bogging down our field at the national level. There is no agreement, no concordance, no general understanding among us of that which we are licensed to do. This must change, and change now during the managed care era. Otherwise, we will clearly be lost in the shuffle of national health care reform.
William Cockburn, DC, DABFE
Whittier, California
Diplomate, American Board of Forensic Examiners