EDITOR’S PAGE

Beth Harkness

This issue of the JNMT is the first issue of the journal after the SNM Annual Meeting. At our society meetings I am always struck by the fact that although the Technologist Section has a larger number of members than the physician/scientist group, their participation at the national level in the SNM Technologist Section, seems to be far less. This fact is most noticeable when attending the governance meetings that are held prior to the mid-winter and annual meetings. Each year, as I attend committee meetings and the National Council of Representatives (NCOR) meeting, I see the same small group of people involved.

This time, it really hit me—so much so that I decided to take a closer look at who is really participating in the leadership of the SNMTS. I found that there are just 90 individuals currently serving in the NCOR and on the committees and task forces of the Technologist Section. (These 90 individuals serve on an average of 2.3 committees each, some far more—and that is probably not because they love sitting in windowless rooms. These individuals are doing all of the leadership work for the 8,000 plus members of the Technologist Section. That’s 1% of the membership and by my observation, that small group hasn’t changed much over the years. I commend their efforts and their dedication to the Technologist Section.

This year the leadership of the Technologist Section has developed policies that will have a definite effect on the future of nuclear medicine technology. The first change is a plan to raise the minimal educational requirement for newly certified nuclear medicine technologists to a baccalaureate degree by 2015. The fact that this is a 10-year plan is illustrative of the magnitude of this goal. A second resolution passed by the NCOR is setting in motion the creation of an advance practice designation for nuclear medicine technologists. This advance practice designation will recognize individuals with skill levels similar to those of a physician’s assistant.

Both of these resolutions will require, in my opinion, refinement and definition in the coming years. There was much discussion, both pro and con. In the end, the leadership decided that these resolutions were necessary for the advancement of the field of nuclear medicine technology. I think time will prove them right.

So why do I find it necessary to bring this up as a topic for my editorial? The answer is that I want the other 7910 plus technologists to think about being more active in their professional organization. You can lead or you can follow. But, if you follow, you will have to live with the decisions of others. Certainly, the 90 leaders that are currently involved in developing policy are very interested in having new individuals participate in the process.

I close with a list of the 90 leaders of the technologist’s section. I compiled this list from the SNM Web site and apologize if I have left someone off. If you are interested in becoming more involved in Technologist Section leadership at the national level, I suggest that you contact one of these individuals. If you aren’t interested in participating, just thank them next time you encounter one of them at the annual meeting or a chapter meeting. They’ll be the one’s hurrying off to a committee meeting, or listening to what other members have to say on some controversial topic, or maybe just sitting with their feet up for a minute. But probably not for long.