Gordy - I understand that the CBOG will soon be electing a new chairperson. I don't know who the candidates
are at this point but I have few concerns and, since most of my communications with CBOG members is with
you, I'll send the questions your way.
1. I remember at the conclave last year there was discussion of reducing the size of the CBOG and having
an examiners group. I'm all in favour of the examiners group so that we can have more qualified examiners
when we need them but reducing the size of the CBOG seems a mistake to me. There are currently 30(?)
CBOG members of which only 6 are international representatives. At a time when the FFF is looking for
international expansion this seems like it will reduce potential international expansion.
2. The recent discussions about the definitions committee has me concerned. In one of his emails Bruce said
that the definitions would be used when testing potential CIs and MCIs and then they wouldn't be expected
to use them. I thought the purpose of the CBOG program was to develop an instruction program that is endorsed
by the FFF. We may need a certain amount of latitude when working with students but I would like to think that
the time and effort I put in to becoming an MCI meant that I was working towards a common goal not that I
was able to pass a test and now I can do what I want. I like to think that doctors who graduate wouldn't fall
back into voodoo charms and alchemy when they started their practice.
That's about it for now.
I'll let you know if I have anything else.
Cheers
Walter