Revision of the occupational therapy practice framework.

119 Aprofession’s official documents reflect the philosophical and practice beliefs of its members. Such documents determine how members of the profession make decisions that influence the viability and evolution of the profession. Typically, documents that originate in the Commission on Practice are reviewed on a 5-year timetable and revised as necessary (American Occupational Therapy Association [AOTA], 2004a). The purpose of this article is to discuss the implications of the American Occupational Therapy Association’s adoption of the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process (AOTA, 2002b) and the potential effects it has had on the profession. This article discusses the Framework’s strengths and limitations and its implications for practice and education. It is hoped that an analysis of these issues will contribute to the discussion of the revision of the document and prompt an earlier review and modification. Analysis began with an exploration of the component parts of the Framework. This was followed by an identification and systematic examination of the concepts, assumptions, and statements written in the document. The concepts, assumptions, and declarative statements in the document are foundational to the Framework’s use and influence how occupational therapists organize their thoughts and actions. Our goal was to evaluate the document to raise concerns regarding how the Framework’s use may affect practice and education. Analysis and recommendations for future revisions of the Framework were based on methods of logical reasoning. Sources for our analysis were Mosey (1996), Nickerson (1986), Rosen (2000), Sorensen (1993), and Stroll (2000). Background