Specialization or uniformity within the profession?

Several articles on the developing specialty of hand therapy within occupational therapy were featured in the September 27, 1990, issue of OT Week. It was disturbing to read, however, that the American Society of Hand Therapists was founded in 1977 not to augment or promote occupational therapy's knowledge base or practice, but rather, to "foster the advancement of the profession of hand therapy" (Clark, 1990, p. 7). An ensuing OT Week article announced that the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA) would soon be sponsoring a specialty certification examination for pediatric occupational therapists Ooe, 1990). There are those occupational therapists who have strongly advocated for a mandatory fieldwork experience in pediatrics for all professional-level occupational therapy students. Likewise, those occupational therapists in mental health insiSt that a psychiatric fieldwork experience is essential. The hue and cry of the reductionists in the field calls for occupational therapists to specialize in treating narrow diagnostic classifications and populations. AJI of this activity Ilies in the face of occupational therapy's holistic roots, as expressed in the Philosophical Base of Occupational Therapy (AOTA, 1979), Uniform Terminology (Dunn & McGourty, 1989), and the Essentials (AOTA, 1983), which gUide us in accrediting our educational programs. The frenzied use of the term specialty was abruptly halted a decade ago, when AOTA changed the name of specialty sections to special interest sections in recognition of the developing nature of occupational therapy as a profession. Yet the movement to fractionalize occupational therapy seems to be alive and well once again. Can a therapeutic intervention such as occupational therapy, Profession?