If Physical Therapists Are Musculoskeletal Experts...

I was reading the summary of a court case which recently had a final decision by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York.  Honestly, it seemed a very boring kind of case that involved a motor vehicle accident which occurred 5 years ago.  Two concepts struck me as issues to think about...

First, when someone has an injury, during our examination and evaluation process, we have more to offer patients than a single entity like range of motion.  Back in 2005 or whenever the physical therapist came into the picture to treat John, would the use of a few self-report measures have been helpful?  Would it have been helpful to have measured level of disability, overall physical function and fear?  If these tools had been a part of the initial report, would they maybe have been introduced and used again in 2008 by the independent examiner?

Second... What does it entail to be an expert? If physical therapists are musculoskeletal experts, how is that defined?  The reason I ask is because a single quote gave me a bit of a gasp response.  "As Supreme Court properly noted, a physical therapist "cannot by definition diagnose or make prognos[e]s and is incompetent to determine the permanency or duration of a physical limitation" (Delaney v Lewis, 256 AD2d 895, 897 [1998]; see Brandt-Miller v McArdle, 21 AD3d 1152, 1154-1155 [2005]; Tornatore v Haggerty, 307 AD2d 522, 522-523 [2003])."

Does that statement seem fully accurate?  I honestly do not believe physical therapists are incompetent in determining permanency or duration of a physical limitation.  I mean, we work with people every single day... we generally have some idea how a patient should progress.  I'd like to think we could make just as good or better of an approximation of how long a physical limitation will persist as most physicians.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this court summary and what it means to us professionally as we move forward to be musculoskeletal experts?

~Selena