01/24/2025    

RESPONSES/COMMENTS (PODIATRIC EDUCATION) - PART 1 B

RE: Why We Need 3-Year Residencies (Daniel Chaskin, DPM)

From: Jeffrey Kass, DPM 

 

Dr. Chaskin brings up an interesting point about the unfairness of the New York podiatry scope. I find it absurd that in order for a podiatrist in New York to treat skin above the ankle, the doctor must be board certified in forefoot and rearfoot surgery. What other medical profession has a board certification requirement by law to treat patients? This law is so absurd. I have younger colleagues who finished three-year surgical residencies and are adept at treating ankle conditions and performing ankle surgery, yet are forced to take their patients to New Jersey to treat their patients because the process in New York takes time to complete. 

 

I agree with Dr. Chaskin that there are numerous lawsuits that can be brought to change the current status quo. Aside from what I mentioned above, there is the fact that “interstate commerce” is being affected. If a doctor is competent to perform an ankle surgery in New Jersey, then they are competent to perform it in New York. Every day I read how various professions are increasing their scope of practice....nurses, NPs, PAs, etc. I wonder when podiatry is going to jump on the bandwagon.

 

Jeffrey Kass, DPM, Forest Hills, NY 

Other messages in this thread:

---

01/23/2025    

RESPONSES/COMMENTS (PODIATRIC EDUCATION) - PART 1 B

RE: Why We Need 3-Year Residencies (Steven Spinner, DPM)

From: Daniel Chaskin, DPM

 

I disagree with Dr. Spinner. Some state legislatures (for example, the NYS legislature) feel we are a specialty with only recognition of being board certified in surgery. When the NYS ankle law was discussed in 2012, there was no mention of the antitrust effects on members of the ABPM, prohibiting medical treatment of the ankle. Board certification in podiatric medicine is not recognized to “medically" treat the ankle. Yet board certification in surgery is required to medically treat the ankle, in the absence of a chronic foot ulcer. 

 

If the written minutes or discussions of the New York State legislature had no mention of the anti-competitive effects on podiatrists who are board certified in podiatric medicine, this 2012 ankle law might be able to be rendered null and void as anticompetitive and not in compliance with federal legislation that prohibits antitrust activity. Scope might be increased to allow podiatrists board certified in podiatric medicine to medically treat the ankle.

 

Can state societies take political action to correct what might be classified as a possible restraint of trade against podiatrists only board certified in podiatric medicine? Do any members of ABPM have similar opinions? Did any state society ever contact the U.S. Dept of Justice and/or the Federal Trade Commission for their opinions on how to recognize the value of being board certified in podiatric medicine, and if not, why not? Problems like this might be a possible reason why there is such low enrollment in our podiatric medical colleges. 

 

Daniel Chaskin, DPM, Ridgewood, NY