Editor’s Note: April 2008
By Maria DiDanieli
By Maria DiDanieli
A recent article in the Canadian history magazine, The Beaver, tells
of how, in 1908, Canada’s governor general, Lord Grey, contrived to
turn Quebec City’s 300th anniversary celebration into a British show of
grandeur. It describes how Grey sent a lineup of powerful British ships
up the St. Lawrence, during a re-enactment of the arrival of Samuel de
Champlain, before an unsuspecting crowd of spectators. The fleet
included a new battleship called HMS Indomitable.
A recent article in the Canadian history magazine, The Beaver, tells of how, in 1908, Canada’s governor general, Lord Grey, contrived to turn Quebec City’s 300th anniversary celebration into a British show of grandeur. It describes how Grey sent a lineup of powerful British ships up the St. Lawrence, during a re-enactment of the arrival of Samuel de Champlain, before an unsuspecting crowd of spectators. The fleet included a new battleship called HMS Indomitable.
Let us imagine that the celebration represents chiropractic, and HMS Indomitable the movement to evidence-based and interdisciplinary practice. While many chiropractors thrive in traditional practice paradigms, a behemoth that cannot be ignored is moving in, threatening to divide and destroy the profession.
What of this feeling that chiropractic must overhaul its traditional paradigms in order to be a worthy player in our health-care system? Is there the risk of being incorporated as a modality rather than remaining a profession, if chiropractic becomes too deeply integrated into medical teams? On the other hand, faced with an opportunity to better understand and collate its experiences, and successes, into useful evidence while functioning in concert with other health-care professionals, why do many chiropractors remain resistant, wishing the profession to stand separate from other health-care strategies? Should the question actually be centred around how all the necessary elements – the unique qualities that make chiropractic efficacious, the strengths of an interdisciplinary approach and the application of evidence within practice – can be combined to the benefit of the profession?
The aforementioned history article is entitled “One Big Happy Empire” and it appears in an issue celebrating the 400th anniversary of Quebec City in 2008. My wish is that chiropractic will unite behind its loudly proclaimed mission to serve as many as possible – as a strong, independent entity – also to reach a 400th anniversary, as a profession. The seemingly indomitable force that would rend it cannot, in fact, be ignored. Perhaps it can be approached in such a way that chiropractic emerges standing at its helm, as a leader – guiding it, as its tool, rather than awaiting destruction beneath its hull.
In this issue, Dr. Jay Greenstein talks to chiropractors about encouraging patients into active participation in their rehabilitation programs through the use of low-tech, portable equipment that can even be used at home. We will hear from Dr. George Roth, the developer of a structural approach to pain relief from various disorders. We will also be updated on the progress that non-surgical spinal decompression is making in medical circles. Dr. Jamie Neely provides the second part of his series that addresses how the art, science and philosophy of chiropractic can support the addition of paediatric patients into a practice. Dr. Emily Roback writes about incorporating chiropractic into search-and-rescue training while discussing how her experience as a hearing-impaired individual has contributed to developments in “adventure” work. Lawyer Lloyd Manning writes about the chiropractor as an expert court witness. You will find all of this and more at www.cndoctor.ca . Please also join our blog discussion – look for upcoming new directions in the ongoing “Integration versus isolation” debate.
Bien a vous.