Dennis has raised an interesting question about the boundaries to OH. I
have every sympathy with a group of professionals who suddenly have
something else foisted upon them (especially if it because no-one quite
knows where to dump it). I ask, however, that we step back and consider the
difference between OH and OHN.
As an academic, I see the age-old story of whether the practitioner whose
title includes a 'knowledge domain' (here occupational health) is the
arbiter on the contents of that knowledge domain. For example are medical
doctors the only people to decide on what is medicine and proper medical
treatment? Are environmental health officers the only ones who can rule on
the environment? The politics of practice, ownership, and the creation of a
profession are heavy topics indeed. In this respect, I have admired
professions (including nursing) which use Donald Schon's concept of the
reflexive practitioner. In his book of that name he contrasts the
traditional professional with the reflexive practitioner model.
S to the main point, I would, of course, point to the phrase Dennis quoted,
i.e. "as part of a multiprofessional occupational health service". OH has
always been that even if, in practice, an OH service often consists of an
OHN who is expected to do 'everything'.
While it is up to the OHNs to decide their own remit, as a non-OHN, I have
always welcomed the knowledge, experience, and advice that they have to
give: that includes both their specialist knowledge and their general
medical training. This includes environmental issues as they affect the
individual's health. Further we will recall the rather fuzzy boundary
between workplace and environment, the workplace being both a part of (and
therefore affected by) and also a creator of the environment.
I understand the desire not to be overwhelmed with work, but environmental
health practitioners need OHNs.
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Macwilliam [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 October 2001 5:24 pm
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: WHO Occupational Health Nursing Report
The recent WHO report "The Role of the Occupational Health Nurse in
Workplace Health Management" is indeed an interesting document.
For instance, take a look at page 32, under the heading "Environmental
Benefits". Hands up all of you out there, "....working independently or
as part of a multiprofessional occupational health service who have been
actively working towards the goal of managing environmental issues using
principles and methods of such strategies as Cleaner Production, Eco-
efficiency, Green Productivity, and Pollution Prevention..."
I'm sure that governments and their agencies would want occupational health
providers to become actively involved in a broader approach to maintaining
and improving the health of 'the community'. But, being realistic [some
might prefer to label it heretical] for a moment, haven't occupational
health providers got their work cut out just dealing with the community
at the workplace?
Dennis M
|