FAQs: Settlement of NATA v. APTA Lawsuit
October 2, 2009 — APTA and the National Athletic Trainers
Association (NATA) on September 23 settled the lawsuit that NATA filed
last year. Frequently Asked Questions about the settlement and the Joint Statement of Cooperation are
listed below (as of 10/2/09).
The news release on NATA's Web site mischaracterizes what the Joint Statement actually says. We
urge APTA members and the public to rely on the actual language in the
Joint Statement. As questions and issues come forward APTA will update
these FAQs.
1. Isn't APTA's agreeing to issue the Joint Statement an admission
that the NATA lawsuit had some merit?
No. NATA's complaint was wholly without merit. APTA agreed to settle
the case only in order to put this matter behind us and return our full
attention to our true purpose - serving our members and achieving APTA's
goals as laid out in our strategic plan.
2. Does the Joint Statement say that athletic trainers are
qualified to do all kinds of manual therapy?
No. The Joint Statement says that some athletic trainers "are
qualified to perform certain forms of manual therapy" and that the
education of athletic trainers "calls for competence in some forms of
manual therapy." These statements are true. In Arizona, Delaware,
Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania the athletic trainers' practice act
places "massage" within the scope of athletic training, and in
Connecticut the statute mentions "light massage."
3. The NATA Web site says that "APTA agrees with NATA that
athletic trainers are qualified to perform these services [i.e., manual
therapy]." Is this statement true?
No. The Joint Statement says only that athletic trainers' education
calls for competence in SOME FORMS of manual therapy and that
some athletic trainers are qualified to perform CERTAIN FORMS of
manual therapy. Here, and in other places, NATA's press release
mischaracterizes what the Joint Statement actually says. We urge APTA
members and the public to rely on the actual language in the Joint
Statement, which was extensively discussed and negotiated, rather than
on NATA's press release.
4. Does the Joint Statement mean that APTA chapters may not oppose
state legislation that would allow athletic trainers to treat
non-athletes?
No. The Joint Statement explicitly recognizes the right of APTA to
"conduct all lawful activities, and make all lawful statements" and the
right of APTA and its members to express their opinions "about others."
APTA will continue to advocate forcefully and effectively to protect the
interests of its members and the public.
5. Under the heading "The Professions" didn't APTA agree to
numerous statements about athletic trainers, including the claim that
they "serve patients through injury and illness prevention, clinical
evaluation and diagnosis, appropriate interventions, management, and
treatment of emergency, acute and chronic medical conditions, and
rehabilitation"?
No. The section headed "The Professions" is what NATA says about
its members, not what APTA says. Note that the section has two
bullets. The one describing athletic trainers begins, "NATA states," and
the one describing physical therapists begins, "APTA states."
6. Does the Joint Statement mean that physical therapists who
offer a continuing education course teaching joint mobilization must
allow athletic trainers to take the course?
No. In the Joint Statement both organizations agree that physical
therapists "are free to refrain from teaching certain content to any
audience if they determine that the content is not appropriate for the
audience."
7. The Joint Statement says that APTA should not make false or
deceptive statements, including false or deceptive statements about
qualifications of athletic trainers. Doesn't this statement hamper
APTA's ability to advocate vigorously, in particular with regard to
matters affecting athletic trainers?
No. APTA does not make false or deceptive statements in our advocacy.
APTA will continue to advocate on behalf of physical therapists,
physical therapist assistants, and their patients.
8. Does the Joint Statement mean that APTA may never use the words
"unqualified" or "non-qualified" to describe athletic trainers?
No. The Joint Statement says only that APTA will not make false or
misleading statements using those adjectives to refer to athletic
trainers. In advocating for its members and the public APTA will
continue to make truthful statements, e.g., "Athletic trainers are not
qualified under Medicare to provide outpatient physical therapy
services." In addition, APTA will continue to express its opinions about
the qualifications of athletic trainers.
9. Did APTA pay NATA any money to settle the lawsuit?
No.
10. If the NATA lawsuit was wholly without merit, why did APTA
agree to settle instead of litigating all the way to the Supreme Court
if necessary?
If the only choice had been to enter into a dishonorable settlement
agreement, then APTA would have continued to fight the lawsuit,
regardless of the cost.
However, it is important to note that nothing has changed as a result
of this agreement. There are no winners here. The settlement
acknowledges a few indisputable truths concerning what physical
therapists and athletic trainers do. APTA will continue as before to
advocate on behalf of the profession and those it serves.
Litigating any lawsuit, even one that is meritless, has many costs.
The legal expenses are only the most obvious. Defending this lawsuit
would have taken up very significant amounts of APTA staff time. The
burden would not have been limited to just the legal department, since
staff members in many other areas (including practice and education,
professional development, government and payment advocacy, federal
government affairs, and state government affairs) could have been torn
away from their APTA work. Far too many hours would have been spent by
APTA staff to help defend the case, and APTA leaders would have been
spending their time preparing for and giving depositions instead of
working to advance Vision 2020 and to carry out our strategic plan.
At the same time, the two associations have committed to confer on
issues of common interest and to discuss disputes between the
professions.
[Last updated: 10/02/09 | Contact: executivedept@apta.org]
|
