1
273 State Registration for Overseas Applicants The Boards of the Council for Pmfessions Supplementary to Medicine keep their registration schemes under constant review. As a result both of this and of various representations made recently, the following statement has been issued to those recruiting and employing PSM staff specifically to clarify the position for applicants educated and trained outside the UK. State registration is not an alternative to proper and rigorous employment selection procedures, but should be seen as a useful adjunct to them. While State registration will not guarantee any given registrant’s competence and suitability for any given post, it will indicate that in the opinion of the Board the registrant has successfully represented himlherself as a reputable practitioner who may be considered equivalent to a UK diplomate/graduate at the time of graduation, and is potentially worthy of consideration on the basis of information received. This note explains the proper status of State registration for employers, managers, and recruiters of PSM staff. The Professions Supplementary to Medicine Act 1960 states that ‘a person shall be entitled to be registered by a Board if he satisfies the Board: (a) that he holds a qualification granted outside the United Kingdom and for the time being accepted for the purposes of this subsection by the Board; and @) if the Board so requires, that he has had sufficient practical experience in the relevant profession’ (section 3(4)). There is not always a clear under- standing of what acceptance for State Registration under this section actually implies. It is neither a meaningless rubber- stamping of any non-UK qualification nor is it a rigorous selection procedure which absolves an employer from discharging hidher proper responsibilities. It is a specific designation in its own right, and the notes below are aimed at clarification of the status it confers on a registrant. State teglstration of a non-UK trained practitioner lmpllesthe following limlted but vew speclflc qualities: 1. The registrant’s education, training, and qualification (or ,education, training, qualification and post-qualification experience), as represented on paper to the Board suggest that hidher competence is likely to be equivalent to that of a UK graduate or diplomate at qualification (but subject to the exemptions below). 2. The registrant has convinced the Board that he or she has attended a reputable bone fide institution of education and training, which, although its course may not in itself be equivalent to the whole of a curriculum as recommended by, say, the relevant UK professional body, will bear comparison with a UK institution in terms of the approach to education and training needed for a health care professional. 3 The registrant has had some experience of working in a hospitalenvironment (or its appropriate equivalent). 4. The registrant has undertaken to abide by the Board’s code of (professional) conduct and hislher name has not currently been removed from the register (for conduct judged to be ‘infamous’ in a professional respect). 5. The registrant, if not already a member of the relevant professional body, will be eligible to join. 6. The registrant should have been eligible for State registration and/or membership of the relevant professional body in hidher country of education, training, and qual- ification. The following qualitles cannot be Inferred from State registratlon alone: 1. Competence in English (to insist on this at the level of State registration would constitutediscrimination under English and EC law). The application procedure for State registration is conducted entirely in English, but this cannot be taken to ensure fluency in communication with prospective patients or colleagues. 2. More than theoretical knowledge of the NHS (or private sector medicine) or of the expectations of health care professionals in the UK. 3. Any personal qualities beyond the ability to have gained the qualification and experience claimed. 4. (In most cases) a track record of successful postqualification employment. Implementing Community Care: Community care plans by Gerald Wskw Ian Leedham and Brian HW. Social Services Inspecforate of fhe Departmht of Health. 1993. 44 pages. The NufXeld Institute, Health Service Studies, at the University of Leeds undertook this work on behalf of the Social Services Inspectorate. It is an analysis of a sample of local authority plans, summarising their content and identifying emerging issues. It also makes buggestions for the next stages of the planning agenda. The authors found great variability in the degree of cooperation between health and local authorities, and in accessibility. They pick out five plans which were attractive and easy to read. Compared with the White Paper’s six key policy objectives, only practical aupport for carers was substantially addressed by all the documents, although aasessment and care management were Been as current priorities. Assessment arrangements were still being tested, definition of roles was vague, and most aspects concerned with funding and costing are described as ‘very embryonic! implementing Community Care: Population needs assessment, good practice guidance by Prh Waferhouse. Department of Health, undated (dispatched January 1993).60 pages. This is in the same format as the publication above, and was sent to directors of social services with the same covering letter, CI(93)S. The Economics and Operational Research Division of the DOH commissioned Price Waterhouse to produce guidance for authorities in estimating the needs of their local populations. It arose from a workshop on population needs assessment for elderly people held by the DOHin June 1992. Illustrated with a bewildering number of large diagrams, which need extensive text to explain them, the report is not an easy read, but it is based on the work of pilot authorities and should provide valuable guidance (as promised in the title) to others at an earlier stage. Equipped for Life: A natlonal survey of disabled living centres and their services by Richard Parnell. Disabled Living Centres Council, 286 Camden Road, London N7 OW, 1993 (ISBN 0 94818621 8). 58 pages. Diagrams. f8.50. The Disabled Living Centres Council is a representative organisation for about 30 disabled living centres. This is a report on the first stage of a survey funded by the Department of Health to audit and evaluate services provided by the centres. The survey was conducted by quest- ionnaire The general findings were lack of space, staff and funding, and inadequate financial or business planning. Future needs will be linked with the development of community care, equal opportunities policies, greater publicity and improved quality of information, and more training. The DLC Council sees a much greater role for itself in the future in guiding and co-ordinating centres to provide a more effective service. Physiotherapy, April 1993, vol79, no 4
