Hr 5688!

[I Surgeon]

In the optometry forum, under " HR 5688....", there is pre written letter to the House Rep. on the AOA website that states that optometrists are the only eye care professionals that treat patients in communities. What a bold face lie. If they want to play that a way then I editted their letter and then sent it to my representative. They made it easy to do just one push of the button... So here is my edition as follows:

As a medical doctor ophthalmologist and a frontline eye care provider serving patients from communities across your district, I wanted to contact you to express strong support to HR 5688, a bill that could help access to medical eye care and other types of health care services and inform my patients who is really taking care of them.

Clearly, individuals who are not qualified or licensed to practice medicine and provide health care should not be permitted to serve patients while misinforming them by calling themselves "doctors". This bill will eliminate all midlevel providers such as optometrists, nurse practitioners with doctorate degree, and physician assistants from identifying themselves as "doctor", which has led to a nationwide confusion regarding patient care. Patients deserve to know whether a MD,DO, or Dentist is taking care of them.

Ophthalmologists, whom are medical doctors, are the primary health care professionals for the eye. In communities, they treat patients each day to treat medically and surgically diseases, injuries, and disorders of the eye and visual systems. Ophthalmologists across the country provide vital medical eye care services, including diagnosis and treatment of glaucoma, diagnosis and treatment of infectious ocular diseases, diagnosis of retinal eye disorders, treatment of ocular trauma and surgical procedures. This bill was developed to eliminate misrepresentation of midlevel practitioners such as optometrists, who primarily deal with contact lens fittings and eye glass distribution from being able to misrepresent themselves as medical doctors, who perform medical and surgical treatment.

Please join with the public to help eliminate this confusion to support HR 5688 and ensure that patient safety and patient access to quality care. Thank you.


It took all of 5 minutes. If you care about your specialty, then stand up and make your voice heard. Believe me, they are- lies and all.

Please no optometrists' comments to this post. "Just my 2 cents"

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[I Surgeon]

In the optometry forum, under " HR 5688....", there is pre written letter to the House Rep. on the AOA website that states that optometrists are the only eye care professionals that treat patients in communities. What a bold face lie. If they want to play that a way then I editted their letter and then sent it to my representative. They made it easy to do just one push of the button... So here is my edition as follows:

As a medical doctor ophthalmologist and a frontline eye care provider serving patients from communities across your district, I wanted to contact you to express strong support to HR 5688, a bill that could help access to medical eye care and other types of health care services and inform my patients who is really taking care of them.

Clearly, individuals who are not qualified or licensed to practice medicine and provide health care should not be permitted to serve patients while misinforming them by calling themselves "doctors". This bill will eliminate all midlevel providers such as optometrists, nurse practitioners with doctorate degree, and physician assistants from identifying themselves as "doctor", which has led to a nationwide confusion regarding patient care. Patients deserve to know whether a MD,DO, or Dentist is taking care of them.

Ophthalmologists, whom are medical doctors, are the primary health care professionals for the eye. In communities, they treat patients each day to treat medically and surgically diseases, injuries, and disorders of the eye and visual systems. Ophthalmologists across the country provide vital medical eye care services, including diagnosis and treatment of glaucoma, diagnosis and treatment of infectious ocular diseases, diagnosis of retinal eye disorders, treatment of ocular trauma and surgical procedures. This bill was developed to eliminate misrepresentation of midlevel practitioners such as optometrists, who primarily deal with contact lens fittings and eye glass distribution from being able to misrepresent themselves as medical doctors, who perform medical and surgical treatment.

Please join with the public to help eliminate this confusion to support HR 5688 and ensure that patient safety and patient access to quality care. Thank you.


It took all of 5 minutes. If you care about your specialty, then stand up and make your voice heard. Believe me, they are- lies and all.

Please no optometrists' comments to this post. "Just my 2 cents"

Here is the link http://capwiz.com/theaoa/issues/alert/?alertid=8881916

 

[Ben Chudner]

In the optometry forum, under " HR 5688....", there is pre written letter to the House Rep. on the AOA website that states that optometrists are the only eye care professionals that treat patients in communities. What a bold face lie.

Speaking of bold face lies, the actual letter reads "Doctors of optometry (ODs) are the primary health care professionals for the eye, serving patients in nearly 6,500 communities across the country. In more than 3,500 of these communities, optometrists are the only eye doctors seeing patients each day to examine, diagnose, treat, and manage diseases, injuries, and disorders of the eye and visual systems, as well as identify related systemic conditions affecting the eye." Your elimination of the first sentence and paraphrasing of the second completely changes its meaning. Your statement is not only inflammatory, but false. If you feel the need to misrepresent the truth to fire up your fellow ophthalmologists, that's fine, but don't expect that we won't reply.

 

[I Surgeon]

Speaking of bold face lies, the actual letter reads "Doctors of optometry (ODs) are the primary health care professionals for the eye, serving patients in nearly 6,500 communities across the country. In more than 3,500 of these communities, optometrists are the only eye doctors seeing patients each day to examine, diagnose, treat, and manage diseases, injuries, and disorders of the eye and visual systems, as well as identify related systemic conditions affecting the eye." Your elimination of the first sentence and paraphrasing of the second completely changes its meaning. Your statement is not only inflammatory, but false. If you feel the need to misrepresent the truth to fire up your fellow ophthalmologists, that's fine, but don't expect that we won't reply.

I was paraphrasing, but this statement is still a lie. optoms are not the only eye doctors in 1 or a million communities. And besides the job description sounds more like that of an everyday ophthalmologist, not refracting optometrist. c'mon gimme a break.

 

[prettygreeneyes]

Please no optometrists' comments to this post. "Just my 2 cents"

What is the point of an open Internet forum if we can't discuss things? Is your point anymore valid if optometrists didn't comment on it?

I would like to know, from your standpoint as a student interested in ophthalmology, a resident, or currently practicing ophthalmologist (not sure which), what would you like optometrists to call themselves?

If the roles were reversed, and you were an optometrist, what would you call yourself? How would you introduce yourself to a patient?

If this bill passes, will it be illegal to introduce myself as "Dr. So and So" despite the fact that I've spent 8 years of my life earning a "doctorate" degree? Are we going to take away that right from a History Ph.D as well?

I pose these questions in a friendly manner, and I hope for respectful and thought-out responses.

 

[Ben Chudner]

I was paraphrasing, but this statement is still a lie. optoms are not the only eye doctors in 1 or a million communities. And besides the job description sounds more like that of an everyday ophthalmologist, not refracting optometrist. c'mon gimme a break.

Well, I am no expert on demographics like you obviously are, but in Sequim, Washington, there are no ophthalmologists "seeing patients each day to examine, diagnose, treat, and manage diseases, injuries, and disorders of the eye and visual systems, as well as identify related systemic conditions affecting the eye". There is a retina specialist that drives in one day a week and another oculoplastics specialist that comes in another day, but they do not see primary care patients and they are not there every day. This is just one community I could name off the top of my head. I am sure there are thousands more where there is a specialist, or even a general ophthalmologist, that only comes in once or twice a week if at all. With the size of the legal department that the AOA has, I am sure they did much more research on this subject than you did.

As for the job description, I agree it does not sound like a refracting optometrist, however, I have never heard of anyone referring to themself as a refracting optometrist. The term is redundant (sort of like arrogant ophthalmology resident), and you know as well as I do that OD's do in fact diagnose, manage, and treat eye diseases.

 

[FamilyMD]

In the optometry forum, under " HR 5688....", there is pre written letter to the House Rep. on the AOA website that states that optometrists are the only eye care professionals that treat patients in communities. What a bold face lie. If they want to play that a way then I editted their letter and then sent it to my representative. They made it easy to do just one push of the button... So here is my edition as follows:

Clearly, individuals who are not qualified or licensed to practice medicine and provide health care should not be permitted to serve patients while misinforming them by calling themselves "doctors". This bill will eliminate all midlevel providers such as optometrists, nurse practitioners with doctorate degree, and physician assistants from identifying themselves as "doctor", which has led to a nationwide confusion regarding patient care. Patients deserve to know whether a MD,DO, or Dentist is taking care of them.

Please join with the public to help eliminate this confusion to support HR 5688 and ensure that patient safety and patient access to quality care. Thank you.


It took all of 5 minutes. If you care about your specialty, then stand up and make your voice heard. Believe me, they are- lies and all.

Please no optometrists' comments to this post. "Just my 2 cents"

I think MD's of all fields need to support this bill. It is so frustrating to find out "Dr. So and so" that is "prescribing" vitamins for your pts turns out to be a chiropractor or something. Pt's only hear "dr" and assume its an MD, so there is confusion and this bill should help. Everybody has a role in healthcare, but reducing confusion as to what one's roles are exactly I fell is a good thing. As an example, my b-i-l is an MD in australia and he was fabberglasted when he visited me to see "everybody here is a frickin dr" LOL

 

[I Surgeon]

What is the point of an open Internet forum if we can't discuss things? Is your point anymore valid if optometrists didn't comment on it?

I would like to know, from your standpoint as a student interested in ophthalmology, a resident, or currently practicing ophthalmologist (not sure which), what would you like optometrists to call themselves?

If the roles were reversed, and you were an optometrist, what would you call yourself? How would you introduce yourself to a patient?

If this bill passes, will it be illegal to introduce myself as "Dr. So and So" despite the fact that I've spent 8 years of my life earning a "doctorate" degree? Are we going to take away that right from a History Ph.D as well?

I pose these questions in a friendly manner, and I hope for respectful and thought-out responses.

I would introduce myself by my first name like I do now and on the sign in front of my office would read John Doe OD, not ambiguously termed Dr. John Doe, primary eye care...furthermore I have seen advertisements stating we specialize in diagnosinginternal health and systemic disease through dilated fundus exams...blah blah blah... how confusing is this.
If you were to state "doctor" before your name optometry should come after.
you need to note it took 4 years to get an optometry doctorate, not 8. everyone gets a bachelors so I don't see how that would count, but to each his own.

I believe if a Phd in history was going around treating patients under the assumption of Medical Doctor then he should have this "right" taken away. But they do not and this Bill was not made because of lying non medical phDs.

I was being sarcastic when I said optoms not to comment, because I knew you would.

 

[prettygreeneyes]

I would introduce myself by my first name like I do now and on the sign in front of my office would read John Doe OD, not ambiguously termed Dr. John Doe, primary eye care...furthermore I have seen advertisements stating we specialize in diagnosinginternal health and systemic disease through dilated fundus exams...blah blah blah... how confusing is this.
If you were to state "doctor" before your name optometry should come after.
you need to note it took 4 years to get an optometry doctorate, not 8. everyone gets a bachelors so I don't see how that would count, but to each his own.
I believe if a Phd in history was going around treating patients under the assumption of Medical Doctor then he should have this "right" taken away. But they do not and this Bill was not made because of lying non medical phDs.

I was being sarcastic when I said optoms not to comment, because I knew you would.

Thanks for your polite response. (Friendly note... sarcasm isn't your strong suit! )

Not that it really supports or negates this bill, but it does not take 4 years to get a Doctorate of Optometry degree... it takes 8. You are of the belief that I shouldn't be able to count the period of time in undergraduate education because "everyone gets a bachelor's".

Since we're all about getting the facts straight here (real doctors, fake doctors etc.), I thought I'd share with you a fact about Americans and higher education...

The following was taken from www.census.gov, under the American Community Survey of 2004.

Percent of People 25 Years and Over Who Have Completed a Bachelor's Degree

Geography: Nevada (My state of residence...)
Estimate: 19.3 Percent
Lower Bound: 18.2 Percent
Upper Bound: 20.4 Percent
(universe = 1,500,676 people)

(United States: Estimate: 27 Percent ,
Lower Bound: 26.8 Percent, Upper Bound: 27.2 Percent)

Again, I'm not posting that as some sort of argument why this bill is right or wrong... but I take it that you're implying that my doctorate degree will mean less because it only takes four years beyond the 4 years that "everyone has done". Well hey... to each his own, right?

Finally, where are all the reports of patients being harmed, by optometrists and other mid-level providers posing as "medical doctors"? Where is the nationwide epidemic that has sparked the creation of the bill?

Sincerely,

A Future "Lying, Non-Medical OD"
(think that will fit on my business cards? )

 

[I Surgeon]

Thanks for your polite response. (Friendly note... sarcasm isn't your strong suit! )

Not that it really supports or negates this bill, but it does not take 4 years to get a Doctorate of Optometry degree... it takes 8. You are of the belief that I shouldn't be able to count the period of time in undergraduate education because "everyone gets a bachelor's".

Since we're all about getting the facts straight here (real doctors, fake doctors etc.), I thought I'd share with you a fact about Americans and higher education...

The following was taken from www.census.gov, under the American Community Survey of 2004.



Again, I'm not posting that as some sort of argument why this bill is right or wrong... but I take it that you're implying that my doctorate degree will mean less because it only takes four years beyond the 4 years that "everyone has done". Well hey... to each his own, right?

Finally, where are all the reports of patients being harmed, by optometrists and other mid-level providers posing as "medical doctors"? Where is the nationwide epidemic that has sparked the creation of the bill?

Sincerely,

A Future "Lying, Non-Medical OD"
(think that will fit on my business cards? )

You are hard to talk to...I thought I implied everyone with a post graduate education, not all of America. OK, then Ophthalmology=12 years or more to practice ophthalmology. You happy. FYI-I believe the creation of the bill was because the public were confused by misleading health care workers. Do you remember the questionaire where most Americans would rather have a MD to treat them? I thought so. Seacrest out!

 

[Ben Chudner]

Do you remember the questionaire where most Americans would rather have a MD to treat them? I thought so. Seacrest out!

I really enjoy how you take statements out of context and use them incorrectly to try and prove a point. The actual survey showed that a majority of patients would prefer to see an MD for advanced eye conditions. What's ironic about your choice to use this survey is that only 28% of those questioned see a ophthalmologist for their eye care while 53% see an optometrist.

 

[PDT4CNV]

I don't understand why anybody would oppose legislation that involves being honest with patients.

Physicians Assistants, Optometrists, Pyschologists, Pharmacists, nurse practicioners and others are calling themselves doctor. This is confusing to patients.

4 years of pharmacy school does not make you a doctor despite the terminology change from Registered Pharmacist to PharmD. Majoring in psychology in college does not make you a doctor, neither does a few extra years after nursing school and neither does 4 years of optometry school or PA school.

What should practicioners in these professions call themselves. Well, call yourself a pharmacist or optometrist or a nurse etc. Is it inappropriate to introduce yourself as Dr. So and so if you didnt go to a school of medicine/osteopathy? Well, yes. If your not an MD or DO then your not a medical doctor.

The idea that not calling yourself doctor is somehow demeaning is absurd. Why get defensive about it. Just be truthful. Thats what this bill addresses and I support it.

 

[FamilyMD]

As my attending in the ICU told a pharmacist who kept trying to get him to change meds during rounds "If you want to be captain, go to captain school!" What we are witnessing are midlevels who try the "back door" approach to be on the top rung.

On an unrelated topic, I have always been taught diabetics need annual eye exams by OPTHALMOLOGISTS, so I have always referred my diabetics to eye md's. is this overkill? Is an optometrist qualified to see diabetics? Reason I ask is it is much quicker to get a pt into see an optometrists while the wait to see the eye md takes much longer. And let's be honest, it tends to be much cheaper to see the optom.

Thanks

 

[UABopt]

As my attending in the ICU told a pharmacist who kept trying to get him to change meds during rounds "If you want to be captain, go to captain school!" What we are witnessing are midlevels who try the "back door" approach to be on the top rung.

On an unrelated topic, I have always been taught diabetics need annual eye exams by OPTHALMOLOGISTS, so I have always referred my diabetics to eye md's. is this overkill? Is an optometrist qualified to see diabetics? Reason I ask is it is much quicker to get a pt into see an optometrists while the wait to see the eye md takes much longer. And let's be honest, it tends to be much cheaper to see the optom.

Thanks

ODs are more than qualified to see diabetic patients, and are well trained to recognize subtle changes of diabetic retinopathy. I would say that at least half of the patients (besides in pediatrics) that we see here at UABSO are diabetic. Let’s face it DM type II is becoming an ever more pervasive problem. Just last Friday I saw a 17 year old female patient recently diagnosed as a type II diabetic, at 17 years old!!!! I think it is like anything else there are ODs who you will feel comfortable referring to and some you probably won’t. On the other hand there are ophthalmologists who I would not let operate on my cat, and others who are fantastic.

OD’s have referred to themselves, and have been referred by others as ‘Doctor’ for years. This is certainly not a recent revelation. We are not trying to misrepresent ourselves. I quite frankly do not appreciate being compared to a “chiropractor prescribing vitamins.” I think if MDs were familiar with our curriculum, our board exams, and our clinical training they would tend to change their minds. Our training is very similar to the training that dentists receive and yet because there is no MD dental counterpart, and no turf wars, the dentists of this world get to stay out of this fight. We are not the same as PA’s or NP’s both of which generally go to school only 2 years after a BS. We are not the same as PharmD.’s who only relatively recently (within the last 30 years) changed to the PharmD. Degree and normally do 2 years of undergrad followed by 4 years of pharmacy school. The only other profession in the US that is somewhat comparable to us in terms of education are DPMs, though they tend to do 3 year residency after completion of school.

To be frank if DPMs and ODs were both specifically included in the language of the bill as Dentists are I would be all for it. I myself am tired of going to my PCPs office only to see a PA he hired more cheaply than he could partner with another doctor and then have her practice almost completely independent of him. I see this as much more of a threat than ODs. The MDs name and title is on the door, and it is not only possible but likely that you will walk in and out of the door having never seen him!!! But, of course this means more money in the pocket of the MD so it will not be faught against. Also, this might be much less of a problem if the PA was better than she is, and I am quite sure that most are.

To be honest I don’t think most ODs care one way or the other what they are called. What I care about is not having to explain my education to each and every patient I see. I would venture to say that a large portion of society does not know that a dentist did not go to medical school, but rather went to dental school. As long as there is no malpractice, I don’t see that there is a problem.

What I really see as being the sad part of all of this is that many MDs would prefer if ODs were far less educated. They would prefer the country to be filled with a person with perhaps a 2 year associates degree that just refracted patients and wrote an Rx for spectacles. This though, of course would be detrimental to patient care. As it stands, whether you go to an OD or an OMD for glasses you should get a full “eye health” exam, which would certainly not be the case is we were not trained as highly as we are, and certainly much pathology would be missed, but hey at least there would be no “competition” for the MDs.

 

[I Surgeon]

I really enjoy how you take statements out of context and use them incorrectly to try and prove a point. The actual survey showed that a majority of patients would prefer to see an MD for advanced eye conditions. What's ironic about your choice to use this survey is that only 28% of those questioned see a ophthalmologist for their eye care while 53% see an optometrist.

How would the patient know if they were seeing a MD if optometrists keep misrepresenting themselves.

 

[jefguth]

How would the patient know if they were seeing a MD if optometrists keep misrepresenting themselves.

Do you have any evidence of optometrists misrepresenting themselves? If so pass it along to the state optometry board for disciplinary action. That's what they are there for.

If a patient is confused or ignorant of their providers credentials, all they have to do is look on the office wall to see the series of degrees, state licenses, fellowships, etc. It's all there, written right on the wall!

 

[Ben Chudner]

What should practicioners in these professions call themselves. Well, call yourself a pharmacist or optometrist or a nurse etc. Is it inappropriate to introduce yourself as Dr. So and so if you didnt go to a school of medicine/osteopathy? Well, yes. If your not an MD or DO then your not a medical doctor.

Technically, aren't DO's doctors of osteopathy and not medical doctors? Aren't MD's truely the only medical doctors since it is the only degree that is a doctor of medicine? And considering that DO is an easier route to practicing medicine, wouldn't patients want to know that they were seeing a DO instead of an MD? And what about dentists? They are not medical doctors either. Why is it ok for them to call themselves doctors? How about vets? Or is that ok because they only work on animals?

 

[Frumps]

Man, there sure are a lot of ODs on an Ophthalmology forum

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Parts of this bill make some sense, but other parts don't so much. There's a few nebulous parts in there about "only qualified providers should be prescribing medication" or some such thing. That part seems inherently dangerous to mid-level providers who are currently writing scripts well within their training. As such, I can't say I like this bill overall.

Here's a thought: would anyone object to a bill that says something to the effect of "if you put Dr. in front of your name, you have to put your degree after it"?

Dr. John Smith, MD
Dr. Jane Smith, OD
Dr. Bob Smith, DC and so on

Seems like a great way to avoid confusion without causing too much trouble.

 

[4424]

Parts of this bill make some sense, but other parts don't so much. There's a few nebulous parts in there about "only qualified providers should be prescribing medication" or some such thing. That part seems inherently dangerous to mid-level providers who are currently writing scripts well within their training. As such, I can't say I like this bill overall.

Here's a thought: would anyone object to a bill that says something to the effect of "if you put Dr. in front of your name, you have to put your degree after it"?

Dr. John Smith, MD
Dr. Jane Smith, OD
Dr. Bob Smith, DC and so on

Seems like a great way to avoid confusion without causing too much trouble.

yea but people will still call themselves dr. smith, not dr smith dc. the confusion would still be there, especially since most people continue to not know the difference between OD, MD or DO.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

yea but people will still call themselves dr. smith, not dr smith dc. the confusion would still be there, especially since most people continue to not know the difference between OD, MD or DO.

Well sure, but if all the paperwork/business cards/signs in the office proclaim "Dr. Smith, DC", then it is the patient's fault if they don't realize what their doctor is.

As for the confusion about what degree means what... there's no easy fix to that one. I'd love to just leave things as they are and let the public deal with it on their own, but we both know that won't get us anywhere. On the other hand, I think everyone knows that MD is a medical doctor and the most highly trained clinicians (DOs, while being on the same level, are not as present in the public mind). The confusion lies with everyone else. Why don't we let them do the PR to get the public educated about what their degrees mean?

 

[prettygreeneyes]

Well sure, but if all the paperwork/business cards/signs in the office proclaim "Dr. Smith, DC", then it is the patient's fault if they don't realize what their doctor is.

As for the confusion about what degree means what... there's no easy fix to that one. I'd love to just leave things as they are and let the public deal with it on their own, but we both know that won't get us anywhere. On the other hand, I think everyone knows that MD is a medical doctor and the most highly trained clinicians (DOs, while being on the same level, are not as present in the public mind). The confusion lies with everyone else. Why don't we let them do the PR to get the public educated about what their degrees mean?

Great post!

 

[Mirror Form]

Technically, aren't DO's doctors of osteopathy and not medical doctors? Aren't MD's truely the only medical doctors since it is the only degree that is a doctor of medicine?

MD's are doctor's of allopathic medicine, while DO's are doctors of osteopathic medicine. Both are medicine, whereas OD's are doctors of optometry. Since the term "doctor" has taken on a connatative meaning of medical doctor, patients are frequently confused by optometrists who call themselves doctor. You could say it's societies fault for being ignorant. However, as professionals, it's our resposibility to educate them, not just be happy with their ignorance.

And considering that DO is an easier route to practicing medicine, wouldn't patients want to know that they were seeing a DO instead of an MD? And what about dentists? They are not medical doctors either. Why is it ok for them to call themselves doctors? How about vets? Or is that ok because they only work on animals?

I don't think that the DO example is a good analogy. DO's receive the exact same training as MD's, so if a patient doesn't know their doctor is a DO then it isn't a big deal since the DO is still qualified to do everything that an MD is. Whereas, OD's are not qualified to practice the same way as ophthalmologists, so the patients should understand what level of provider they are seeing. And obviously there is no confusion with vets.

 

[Ben Chudner]

From the AMA's website: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/3627.html#MD_DO


What is the difference between a physician and a doctor?

A physician is an MD or DO (see above). Many people also refer to physicians informally as doctors, eg., "Doctor Smith." Strictly speaking, however, anyone with a doctorate degree (eg., PhD, EdD, PharmD [pharmacist], or DDS [dentist]) is a doctor as well.



I just thought it was funny that the AMA realizes that MD's do not have the monopoly on the title of doctor. On top of that, your own association believes the term "doctor" is an informal title. Maybe you should start introducing yourselves as "Physician Smith" instead of "Doctor Smith".

 

[PDT4CNV]

Technically, aren't DO's doctors of osteopathy and not medical doctors? Aren't MD's truely the only medical doctors since it is the only degree that is a doctor of medicine? And considering that DO is an easier route to practicing medicine, wouldn't patients want to know that they were seeing a DO instead of an MD? And what about dentists? They are not medical doctors either. Why is it ok for them to call themselves doctors? How about vets? Or is that ok because they only work on animals?

DO's, while having slightly different focus in medical school, must still cover the same material, go through the internship and residency programs, and obtain the same license to practice medicine.

To date, I have not encountered a patient who is confused about what a dentist is. It is probably unnecessary to include dentists in the bill. But, I didn't write the bill.

Lastly, I think a point in the bill is that using the word "doctor" in a degree name does not a doctor make. The "Building Engineer" in our hospital didn't go to engineering school. What does he do? He's the janitor. Having the word "engineer" in his title does not make him an engineer. The benefit of the bill is to take the burden off of the public. Maybe your patients are harvard grads, mine are not. But, they still care about the qualifications of their healthcare providers. This is not to imply that auxillary healthcare providers introducing themselves as "doctor" are intentionally misleading patients, but patients may noneltheless be mislead into thinking their provider is an MD.

Hmmm...do you think the bill applies to time travelers (Doctor Who)?

 

[Ben Chudner]

The benefit of the bill is to take the burden off of the public. Maybe your patients are harvard grads, mine are not. But, they still care about the qualifications of their healthcare providers. This is not to imply that auxillary healthcare providers introducing themselves as "doctor" are intentionally misleading patients, but patients may noneltheless be mislead into thinking their provider is an MD.

I can understand your point above. I do, however, disagree with your point that using the word "doctor" in a degree name does not a doctor make. This is because a doctorate degree "does a doctor make" (even according to the AMA). That is why PhD's, EdD's, etc can use the title of doctor. In fact, it's the actual reason MD's can use the title of doctor. If you want to change are education system to redefine these degrees that is fine, good luck. Otherwise, I would suggest you stick to those EyeMD ads to educate the public about the difference between doctors and physicians.

 

[rubensan]

indeed!

Man, there sure are a lot of ODs on an Ophthalmology forum

 

[I Surgeon]

I can understand your point above. I do, however, disagree with your point that using the word "doctor" in a degree name does not a doctor make. This is because a doctorate degree "does a doctor make" (even according to the AMA). That is why PhD's, EdD's, etc can use the title of doctor. In fact, it's the actual reason MD's can use the title of doctor. If you want to change are education system to redefine these degrees that is fine, good luck. Otherwise, I would suggest you stick to those EyeMD ads to educate the public about the difference between doctors and physicians.

Ask the public, Doctor=medical school (MD), if you introduce your self as "Doctor" and you are not dealing with 4 legged furry creatures or in a dentist office, then you are a poser and misleading the public that you are a MD. Plain and simple. Very easy.

 

[jefguth]

Hrm, so you assume the public knows that dentists are not MD's while CHART's own survey demonstrated that 33% of the public thinks that dental assistants are medical doctors? My guess is that at least 72% think their dentist is an MD. Now I wonder if the survey CHART holds up in demonstration of the 'need' for this bill actually tried to measure that, or if for the sake of political expediency the medical groups ignored those findings. It would be nice to actually have a link to a full report of the survey they conducted.

Additionally, the CHART press release includes a link (http://72.32.4.217/AAO/SFX7B6.pdf) to view examples of the types of suppossed misrepresentations that the legislation was designed to address. While I would have to agree that the audiologist advertisement is questionable since as far as I know audiologists are not liscensed to use the doctor title, the optometry advertisement submitted in support clearing indicated that the practioners at that location are "Doctors of Optometry."

This whole push is looking more and more amateur...

 

[exmike]

Hrm, so you assume the public knows that dentists are not MD's while CHART's own survey demonstrated that 33% of the public thinks that dental assistants are medical doctors? My guess is that at least 72% think their dentist is an MD. Now I wonder if the survey CHART holds up in demonstration of the 'need' for this bill actually tried to measure that, or if for the sake of political expediency the medical groups ignored those findings. It would be nice to actually have a link to a full report of the survey they conducted.

Additionally, the CHART press release includes a link (http://72.32.4.217/AAO/SFX7B6.pdf) to view examples of the types of suppossed misrepresentations that the legislation was designed to address. While I would have to agree that the audiologist advertisement is questionable since as far as I know audiologists are not liscensed to use the doctor title, the optometry advertisement submitted in support clearing indicated that the practioners at that location are "Doctors of Optometry."

This whole push is looking more and more amateur...

Intereting. In your PDF, the "Doctor of Optometry" offers LASIK.

 

[PDT4CNV]

Hrm, so you assume the public knows that dentists are not MD's while CHART's own survey demonstrated that 33% of the public thinks that dental assistants are medical doctors? My guess is that at least 72% think their dentist is an MD. Now I wonder if the survey CHART holds up in demonstration of the 'need' for this bill actually tried to measure that, or if for the sake of political expediency the medical groups ignored those findings. It would be nice to actually have a link to a full report of the survey they conducted.

Additionally, the CHART press release includes a link (http://72.32.4.217/AAO/SFX7B6.pdf) to view examples of the types of suppossed misrepresentations that the legislation was designed to address. While I would have to agree that the audiologist advertisement is questionable since as far as I know audiologists are not liscensed to use the doctor title, the optometry advertisement submitted in support clearing indicated that the practioners at that location are "Doctors of Optometry."

This whole push is looking more and more amateur...

I understand why optometry and other professions are defensive about this. You obviously feel that you in fact are a doctor. If you feel that way, then there is no point in discussing this with you. The public associates doctor with MD. Plain and simple. Pick at it all you want, try to make it seem flawed. But, please do it in the optometry forum. There is no consensus building going on in the OPHTHALMOLOGY forum on this issuue. Being truthful and honest with the public about one's background, qualifications, and training is quite important. The fact that optometry and other professesions have become so defensive regarding this issue speaks for itself.


I have to go, I hear the doctor of trash collection pulling up and I have some garbage samples for him.

 

[JR]

I understand why optometry and other professions are defensive about this. You obviously feel that you in fact are a doctor. If you feel that way, then there is no point in discussing this with you. The public associates doctor with MD. Plain and simple. Pick at it all you want, try to make it seem flawed. But, please do it in the optometry forum. There is no consensus building going on in the OPHTHALMOLOGY forum on this issuue. Being truthful and honest with the public about one's background, qualifications, and training is quite important. The fact that optometry and other professesions have become so defensive regarding this issue speaks for itself.


I have to go, I hear the doctor of trash collection pulling up and I have some garbage samples for him.

 

[jefguth]

I understand why optometry and other professions are defensive about this. You obviously feel that you in fact are a doctor. If you feel that way, then there is no point in discussing this with you. The public associates doctor with MD. Plain and simple. Pick at it all you want, try to make it seem flawed. But, please do it in the optometry forum. There is no consensus building going on in the OPHTHALMOLOGY forum on this issuue. Being truthful and honest with the public about one's background, qualifications, and training is quite important. The fact that optometry and other professesions have become so defensive regarding this issue speaks for itself.

It’s interesting how dismals like this speak volumes in the absence of a rationale justification to support this bill. I’m afraid the world is not as plain and simple as you would hope. However, when you employ the powerful tool of ignoring conflicting ideas and thoughts, I can see how things would be so simple.

If the big boys really want to discuss issues without their rivals getting in the way, they should realize that a place like SDN is not exactly a private forum…

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

I understand why optometry and other professions are defensive about this. You obviously feel that you in fact are a doctor. If you feel that way, then there is no point in discussing this with you. The public associates doctor with MD. Plain and simple. Pick at it all you want, try to make it seem flawed. But, please do it in the optometry forum. There is no consensus building going on in the OPHTHALMOLOGY forum on this issuue. Being truthful and honest with the public about one's background, qualifications, and training is quite important. The fact that optometry and other professesions have become so defensive regarding this issue speaks for itself.


I have to go, I hear the doctor of trash collection pulling up and I have some garbage samples for him.

You're correct, overall the public does equate Doctor with MD (or DO, though that's a bit trickier). However, ODs have been called doctor for something on the order of 60 years. Seems kinda crappy of us to take that away from them like this.

On the other hand, my previously mentioned idea of requiring academic credentials (ie. initials) after one's name if they have Doctor written anywhere would seem to go a long way towards fixing said patient confusion. If a patient goes to an MD for general surgery, physicals, OB/GYN stuff... well, hopefully they will notice if their eye doc has an OD after his name (compared to all his other providers) and maybe even ask what the difference is. I don't expect patients to be rocket scientists, but I do expect them to be able to tell that MD is not the same as OD when written down and presented to them.

Shouldn't it be Doctor of garbology?

 

[mdneale]

The fact is, the general public doesn't really care whether you are an optometrist or ophthalmologist. They should, but they don't. When friends and family ask me what I'm going to specialize in, I say, "eye surgery." Invariably, their eye brows arch, and they say, "oooh." I take this to mean that there is no longer any confusion whether I'm going to be dispensing glasses or not. Try it sometime--you will feel much better about the ODs using the term "eye doctor" when you call your self an "eye surgeon."

 

[drgregory]

The fact is, the general public doesn't really care whether you are an optometrist or ophthalmologist. They should, but they don't. When friends and family ask me what I'm going to specialize in, I say, "eye surgery." Invariably, their eye brows arch, and they say, "oooh." I take this to mean that there is no longer any confusion whether I'm going to be dispensing glasses or not. Try it sometime--you will feel much better about the ODs using the term "eye doctor" when you call your self an "eye surgeon."

finally some sense. im an OD, i use eye doctor. my partners (ophthalmologists) seem to have no problems referring to me as Dr. ___. i introduce myself using just my name. they already know that they are seeing an eye care professional - i dont really need to puff up and call myself DR. even the surgeons usually dont refer to themselves as DR.
i dont really care, but from my perspective, i really dont see why dentists are never scrutinized. training is identical, at least according to a DDS/OD buddy of mine and he went to UofMN dental school. most ODs just want a level of respect a dentist gets. at least the non-cowboy ODs who realize that they shouldnt be surgeons.
have to agree with someone earlier about all of the PAs and NPs that are taking over medicine and practicing independently. this is exponentially more dreadful than ODs, DDSs, and DPMs being autonomous providers.

 

[JMK2005]

You're correct, overall the public does equate Doctor with MD (or DO, though that's a bit trickier). However, ODs have been called doctor for something on the order of 60 years. Seems kinda crappy of us to take that away from them like this.

On the other hand, my previously mentioned idea of requiring academic credentials (ie. initials) after one's name if they have Doctor written anywhere would seem to go a long way towards fixing said patient confusion. If a patient goes to an MD for general surgery, physicals, OB/GYN stuff... well, hopefully they will notice if their eye doc has an OD after his name (compared to all his other providers) and maybe even ask what the difference is. I don't expect patients to be rocket scientists, but I do expect them to be able to tell that MD is not the same as OD when written down and presented to them.

Shouldn't it be Doctor of garbology?

The real issue is scope of practice and what ODs are allowed to do legally. It seems that patients are barraged with so many different health professionals with so many different degrees, that they don't really know who's allowed to do what. They just trust that since the government has licensed them to do whatever it is that they are trying to do, then it must be OK.

Example, it boggles my mind that patients would let an ENT, who's done a plastic's fellowship, do a boob job. If an OD tells a patient that he could do LASIK, there would be a fair amount of people who would say 'go ahead'. The only thing stopping the ODs now is that it is illegal.

It doesn't matter who is called 'Doctor' these days. Patients, barely know what residency training is. It matters we have a clear scope of practice for optometrist and ophthalmologists, which means ODs should leave the surgery and the medicine to US. If we can't do using our respective professional society, then it's up to the government to legislate!

 

[GuP]

It’s interesting how dismals like this speak volumes in the absence of a rationale justification to support this bill. I’m afraid the world is not as plain and simple as you would hope. However, when you employ the powerful tool of ignoring conflicting ideas and thoughts, I can see how things would be so simple.

If the big boys really want to discuss issues without their rivals getting in the way, they should realize that a place like SDN is not exactly a private forum…

Calling yourself rival is quite flattering. Let's make this clear - OPTOMETRISTS ARE IN NO WAY ABLE TO COMPETE WITH OPHTHALMOLOGISTS IN ANY ARENA OF EYE CARE, WITH MAYBE THE EXCEPTION OF FITTING CONTACT LENSES.

Please don't argue otherwise. If you want to call yourself a doctor and feel good about it, go ahead. It doesn't change the fact that you are not a MD.

 

[Ben Chudner]

Calling yourself rival is quite flattering. Let's make this clear - OPTOMETRISTS ARE IN NO WAY ABLE TO COMPETE WITH OPHTHALMOLOGISTS IN ANY ARENA OF EYE CARE, WITH MAYBE THE EXCEPTION OF FITTING CONTACT LENSES.

Please don't argue otherwise. If you want to call yourself a doctor and feel good about it, go ahead. It doesn't change the fact that you are not a MD.

And herein lies the problem. You think of this as a competition.

 

[GuP]

And herein lies the problem. You think of this as a competition.

Not at all. I was merely clarifying jefguth's comment stating that optometrists are on the same grounds as ophthalmologists and, hence, are rivals. In order to be rivals, one has to be about the same caliber.

 

[jefguth]

Whoa, would you be able to calm down if I found you a synonym whose literal definition will not get your panties is such a knot?

It’s clear this thread has degenerated into meaningless war of egos when one word, taken out of the context of its sentence, becomes the inspiration for yet another round of vitriol.

 

[GuP]

Whoa, would you be able to calm down if I found you a synonym whose literal definition will not get your panties is such a knot?

It’s clear this thread has degenerated into meaningless war of egos when one word, taken out of the context of its sentence, becomes the inspiration for yet another round of vitriol.

*sigh*

*looks around and shoves all ODs back to the optometry forum*

 

[JR]

OK, the thread has obviously degenerated quickly as did numerous previous thread on the same subject. Time to hang up a closed sign