Ray West's Message to ATRA Board

I asked Ray West if I might post his response on the proposed ATRA "model" on the RT Blog and he gave me his permission. It appears below:

ATRA Board of Directors,

I have offered comments on this model before and the model hasn't changed much since my last comments. See the attached message. What has changed is there is no need for ATRA to establish this model. This model was Initially proposed when the ATRA Board of Directors was considering a 'merger' with NTRS, which was not possible, and now NTRS is no longer a branch of NRPA. There is no value in establishing this model, it will not attract membership (anyone can join ATRA now) and it will likely drive membership away from ATRA. The proposed model is what contributed to the ineffectiveness and eventual demise of NTRS and what helped to establish ATRA. The model is theoretical, not factual, and it is not an accurate reflection of the profession or of practice.

Specifically, slide 5 is more misinformation that seems to reflect little understanding of where most practitioners work or what most practitioners do in their daily work. This type of misinformation significantly undermines the work of the Public Policy Team with CMS and will hurt efforts to have CMS improve regulations or guidance regarding recreational therapy practice.

Slide 6 is simply not accurate. Look at NCTRC and DOL statistics that describe where practitioners work and what they do.

Slide 7 is not consistent with the ATRA definition of recreational therapy. Treatment services do not "define and promote..." Recreational therapy is the use of structured interventions, by qualified and competent recreational therapists, to restore, remediate and rehabilitate specific aspects of patients'/clients' physical, cognitive, social and emotional functioning to improve functioning and independence in life activities. Recreational therapy, as defined by ATRA, is consistent with the CMS definition of active treatment. The proposed model represents the type of inconsistent communication by some in the profession that reflects a lack of understanding of health care which results in limited recognition and limited support of recreational therapy by JC, CARF and CMS. If this model is applied it will further diminish CMS, JC, and CARF recognition and support of recreational therapy. The result will be a loss of recreational therapy positions in health care settings.

Slide 9 implies that there are enough ATRA members interested in recreation and inclusion services to create a bureaucratic structure to respond to both types of services (recreation and treatment). If implemented this model will create an inefficient and ineffective manner of operation that will reduce resources and focus on recreational therapy which has far greater needs and greater numbers of practitioners that those who work in recreation settings.

This model persists in describing that it will 'unify' the profession when in reality this model is what divides the profession. There is substantial professional literature and health care literature to support the view that the proposed model is not consistent with practice in health care settings and divides the profession. Advancing recreational therapy services in health care settings is what the focus of ATRA should be and why ATRA was created.

Why does the ATRA Board of Directors continue to demonstrate more support for the Joint Task Force views in advancing the proposed model than it does for ATRA Past Presidents' views on this model?

Ray

Ray E. West, LRT/CTRS
ATRA Founding Member, ATRA Past President and ATRA Distinguished Fellow