This snippet is from Natasha Layton.
Many practitioners become frustrated working in disability services BECAUSE of the restrictive processes and inadequate funding that requires them to constantly compromise on best practice. Adequate funding and service development focussed on consumer outcomes rather risk reduction would go a long way to retaining existing staff and encouraging people to continue working in the area.
- Natasha Layton
This makes perfect sense to me – you must study and learn all about the best way to do things, then suddenly discover you can’t actually DO things that way because nobody can afford it. When I used the OTs at my local health center the average time they stayed was less than a year, because they had to cut SO many corners and see clients so briefly and provide such inadequate service that everybody hated the job
It seems to me that proper funding of visits to the appropriate prescriber (OTs, speech therapists, physiotherapists, or whoever applies depending on the disability and the equipment) – and however many visits the prescriber deems necessary, not just one – should be a standard part of an aids and equipment program.