Dr. Middlemas,
You bring up some interesting points. I appreciate your viewpoint and hope you don't mind me sharing mine as well.
There seems to be some confusion regarding the reduced dues. Dues have been reduced for students, but as far as young professionals are concerned, they only get a break for their first year in the profession - "career starter dues."; The way that works is that their district dues will be waived for their first year of membership. After the "career starter" year, these younger members will pay as much as you and I and other experienced members pay. That said, the idea that students and first year YPs are getting the same benefits for less should be somewhat secondary to the big picture of involvement. I would hope those who have been involved for years would appreciate the NATA and love it as much as I do (after being a member for a mere 5 years). If that were the case, I would hope they wouldn't be insulted by the NATA's efforts to make changes to get those who are uninvolved involved, and but would instead find themselves encouraged at the potential
increase in involvement in the NATA and consequent advancement of our profession.
To pull a quote from the signature of your email, "Risks must be taken, because the greatest hazard in life is to risk nothing." If the NATA has no young members, it will eventually weaken and probably cease to exist. I see these changes the NATA is making as risks...the board knew they would be unpopular with many members, but they also knew we wouldn't survive without change. Right now, a significant number of ATs don't think there's anything in the NATA for them, so they aren't spending their money on what they perceive to be irrelevant to their interests (I personally don't see how an organization of ATs for ATs can be irrelevant to an AT, but somehow it is - even to some "boomers" - ie nonmember ATEP directors). So, we have to start from the other end...rather than trying to make young ATs pay for something they don't want, we must make NATA more relevant, get them hooked, and then get them involved.
I sympathize with may who may say it shouldn't be about whether or not it's "worth it." I agree with you, actually. I personally think everyone should join the NATA because it's the right thing to do - it's professional, it's responsible, it's "right." The majority of the younger ATs (I'm a gen Yer so I'm included here and can vouch for this) often don't bite on the "Do it because you should" idea. We want obvious worth, bang for our buck, we want definite value. "If it's not worth it, why would I waste my time and money." Again, we are products of our "give it to me now, where's the best deal" society. Sad, but true.
The concept of different membership categories is a valid one. I could understand giving limited access to members who don't pay as much, but that would potentially limit involvement. Is that what we want? I think a huge problem inherent in not being an NATA member is lack of awareness of the issues facing our profession. I don't think I get any information about our profession from anyone except the NATA. So those who aren't members are likely oblivious to what's happening. That may be more dangerous than apathetic people who pay their dues and don't do anything. If non-members don't even know what's going on in their profession, how can they get involved? Even an apathetic member might browse their email once in a blue moon and one day take the step to get involved, the nonmember doesn't have that chance.
I completely agree with your sentiments regarding "necessary" expenses. I try to express the importance of NATA membership to my students and when they say "I can't afford it," I have started to say "do you have a cell phone? Do you pay for CDs or iTunes? Do you go out on the weekends? Do you have an iPod?"; All these things are extra, so if they can answer yes to these things, I can confidently say that I don't buy the "I can't afford it" excuse. But again, Gen Xers and Yers won't pay for something that isn't valuable, relevant, and appealing to them. Right or wrong, that's how the majority of the younger generations think.
I think the changes the NATA is making will actually take the burden off of those who have been shouldering it for so long. If you think about it, you all have been shouldering the burden because my generation and those behind me have not felt compelled to get involved. The NATA is trying to light a fire under us so we'll get involved, in essence making your load lighter. I don't see how reducing YPs dues for one year and giving them the same benefits as someone who's paid higher dues makes that person's burden any heavier...I am not affected by the dues anyone else pays. I am affected by whether or not I get involved and get my money's worth. I am affected by whether others are involved or not, because if they aren't I'm doing everything all by myself. I'm sure many of you can sympathize with that. I want change for our profession, and I don't want to do it all by myself, and I want my era of athletic trainers to step up. I hope you all do too.
Kim Detwiler
-------------------------------------------
Kim Detwiler, MS, ATC, CSCS
Asst. Professor, Asst. Athletic trainer
Movement and Sports Sciences Department
University of La Verne
1950 Third St.
La Verne, CA 91750
(909)593-3511 ext. 4184
"IT IS FROM NUMBERLESS DIVERSE ACTS OF COURAGE AND BELIEF THAT HUMAN HISTORY IS SHAPED. EACH TIME A MAN STANDS UP FOR AN IDEAL, OR ACTS TO IMPROVE THE LOT OF OTHERS, OR STRIKES OUT AGAINST INJUSTICE, HE SENDS FORTH A TINY RIPPLE OF HOPE AND CROSSING EACH OTHER FROM A MILLION DIFFERENT CENTERS OF ENERGY AND DARING THOSE RIPPLES BUILD A CURRENT THAT CAN SWEEP DOWN THE MIGHTIEST WALLS OF OPPRESSION AND RESISTANCE." (Robert Francis Kennedy, South Africa, 1966).
------------------------------------------
.
