Dangers inherent in the partition of occupational therapy and occupational science.

Occupational science, an outgrowth of occupational therapy, is an emerging basic science that has been defined as the systematic study of humans as occupational beings (Clark et aI., 1991; Yerxa et aI., 1989). The research and theory development that emanates from occupational science is intended to enhance both the scholarly foundation and professional practice of occupational therapy (Clark, 1991; Clark et aI., 1991). As occupational science expands, new inSights concerning [he nature of occupation and the manner in which it enriches people's lives are expected to emerge; such insights will spur the development of improved therapeutic techniques and thereby generate important yields both to the profession and to the clients whom it serves. In recogni[ion of [his rich pOtential, the American Occupational Therapy Foundation recently provided funding to es[ablish an occupa[ional science-based Research Center at the University of Southern California to promote the study of occupation and its relationship to adaptation and the challenges of aging and disabili[y. In the September 1992 issue of the American JournaL of OccupationaL Therapy, Mosey argued for the necessity of a complete partition (i.e., separa[ion) of occupational therapy from occupational science. In support of this pOSition, she contended that the focus of scientific inquiry in occupational therapy (the development of frames of reference used to gUide practice) differs from the purpose of occupational science (the derivation of theories). Prescriptively, she maintained that occupational therapy should pursue applied research only, whereas occupational science should concern itself solely with Florence Clark, Ruth Zemke, Gelya Frank, Diane Parham, Ann Neville-Jan, Cynthia Hedricks, Michael Carson, Linda Fazio, Beatriz Abreu