{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019830028328611898, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00141643059490085, 'mean_word_length': 5.075268817204301, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Academy of Paediatrics

Professor Menahem’s consideration that an Academy of Paediatrics should be considered at this time rather than a fully separate College of Paediatrics is indeed what was recently recommended to the Royal Australasian College of Physicians and the Division of Paediatrics by a steering group. In 1930 in the United States, the decision was taken that a separate professional entity on behalf of children was necessary – hence the formation of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). At that time, the idea that children had unique developmental and health needs was new. Note that the AAP is an Academy of Pediatrics, not of paediatricians. This is a critical and fundamentally important difference in mission. The mission is about children and their health needs, the structures are to facilitate optimal care of children (this is also true for the UK Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health). These organisations place the needs of children at the centre of their purpose and mission. Emanating from this is a clear advocacy, policy development and training/curriculum voice. Policy development and training in child health is not for the good of the organisation or of the membership, but for children and their health. Where does an Academy of Paediatrics for Australia and New Zealand fit in this debate? We lag behind in our advocacy/policy development on behalf of children and do not have significant connection between our curriculum of training in paediatrics or our continuing professional development (CPD) curricula and child health policy and advocacy. There is, therefore, a need to reconfigure our professional body, to ensure children’s health is at the centre, and policy on children’s health matters and curriculum of training in paediatrics are linked. Such a reconfiguration needs to be mindful of the matters raised by Professor Menahem, that we are a relatively small paediatric enterprise compared with the United States and the United Kingdom, and that the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP), as the certifying body, has a long history and is well respected. Hence, the recommendation that we form an Academy. The Academy would undertake paediatric training for trainees and Fellows (as CPD), be active in policy/advocacy matters for children, and link training with policy. By not forming a separate College, we would leave certification of specialist status with the RACP, meaning the qualification after training remains as it is now. What has yet to be decided is the extent of delegation of training from the RACP to the Academy. Much consultation with our trainees and Fellows will follow over the next year. Prof. Kevin Forsyth Department of Paediatrics Flinders University and Flinders Medical Centre Adelaide, South Australia Australia References