Has anyone experienced/witnessed this?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
E

edieb

Senior Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2004
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
77
Members don't see this ad.
This is from an American Psychological Association website for clinical psychologists. The post was in response to a bill put forth by the American Psychiatric Association (ApA) that will prevent psychologists from addressing themselves as "doctor" There is OUTRAGE on the listserv about this bill, which is near passing in one state (Michigan) and being introduced next year in California and 11 other states.

I am curious if anybody else, especially in the state system, has noticed the flagrant disregard for our degrees that this poor poster to the listserv has endured...

Darin,

Thanks for your clarfication. In that narrow context, it certainly
does not seem to be an unreasonable distinction.

And you are also correct that arrogance exists in all professions --
we are certainly not immune.

However, while I know you intended it as a joke, it does distress me
that we do often foster the belittlement of our profession referring
to ourselves as "fake doctors."

I currently am working in an assisted livin facility where my
supervisor and I PRIVATELY refer to ourselves as fake doctors because
that is precisely how we feel. When the internist or psychiatrist
comes in, the staff gather charts and then residents and make sure
that the physician is busy minute-to-minute. We in-house
psychologists, on the other hand, are left to literally troll the
hallways "ambulance chasing" our patients to beg and plead them to
keep their scheduled appointment. Adding insult to injury, I strongly
doubt that the facility administrator has ever said to a physician "I
really think all this person needs is [insert medication/procedure.]"
But we are constantly bomdarded with "Oh, all you need to do with Mr.
X is ... "

I have the joy of working in this facility after a brief tenure in a
state facility where they get to totally ignore scope of practice
licensing laws. To be fair, they do that for ALL professions.
However, I do not see the physicians being supplanted with allied
health professionals who get to call themselves physicians. You can
come into our state civil service system with a Master's degree and
legally be called a psychologist. As a doctoral level (real)
psychologist, I was repeatedly and pointedly reminded that I was "no
better" than the Master's level practitioners. (In fact, I actually
had one person say all I did for my doctorate was do an "extended
book report.")

Bottom line, yes, it may make sense for the AMA to keep nursing from
moving that much closer to erasing the final demarcation between the
two professions. But this proposal also has the sweeping effect of
closing a door on EVERY doctoral healthcare profession.

And, IMHO, psychology has been too eager, for the sake of avoiding
discord, to just accept being "fake doctors."

Steve
 
that's awful. For one thing, getting a Ph.D does earn you the right to be called a doctor; that has been pretty standard.

I don't know if they are demeaning the profession as a whole (which it kind of seems like they are), but it is sad because psychologists can have a greater impact on someone's life than a physician.

If anything, if they HAVE to call someone a fake doctor, give the title to psychiatrists. Psychologists don't claim to medical doctors (or at least I don't think they do; it seems more of like a Philosophical Doctor, which is exactly what the degree says the person is!). Now, if psychologists claim to be strictly medical doctors then they *may* have a point in calling them "fake doctors", but if they don't they have to keep that doctor title (unless you can call people with a Ph.D in religion, philosophy, biology, chemistry, music?, etc... "fake doctors" as well :-D)
 
Where did you find this information? I would like to read more about this legislation.
 
The2abraxis said:
If anything, if they HAVE to call someone a fake doctor, give the title to psychiatrists.
Click to expand...

In what way do you think that psychiatrists are fake doctors?

It seems like the general rationale for opposing allied health professionals calling themselves doctors is the ambiguity of the word "doctor", not a way to demean the professions. The word "doctor" is a kind of appellative, so when you're talkig to someone who has a PhD you call them "doctor so-and-so". But in the third person when you say "so-and-so is a doctor", it means that "so-and-so is a physician".

Does that legislation address the appellative second-person sense, the third person sense, or both? It definitely seems like the third person sense should be illegal... It's obviously not appropriate to say "my english professor is a doctor", when you mean "my english professor has a doctorate".
 
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION HOUSE OF DELEGATES​




Resolution: 303​


(A-08)​



Introduced by: Illinois Delegation

Subject: Protection of the Titles "Doctor," "Resident" and "Residency"

Referred to: Reference Committee C
(David M. Lichtman, MD, Chair)






Whereas, Certain specialty societies recognize that many allied health care professions have improved their educational standards and incorporated doctorate designations in their training programs; and

Whereas, Many nursing schools have re-titled their training program as a Residency and their students as Residents, despite the traditional attribution of these titles to medical doctors and their training programs; and

Whereas, The growing trend of this title encroachment is of concern because patients will be confused when the titles of Doctor, Resident and Residency are applied to non-physicians who hold non-medical doctorates or to non-physicians in training; therefore be it

RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association adopt that the title “Doctor,” in a medical setting, apply only to physicians licensed to practice medicine in all its branches, dentists and podiatrists (New HOD Policy); and be it further

RESOLVED, That our AMA adopt policy that the title “Resident” apply only to individuals enrolled in physician, dentist or podiatrist training programs (New HOD Policy); and be it further

RESOLVED, That our AMA adopt policy that the title “Residency” apply only to physician, dentist or podiatrist training programs (New HOD Policy); and be it further

RESOLVED, That our AMA serve to protect, through legislation, the titles “Doctor,” “Resident” and “Residency.” (Directive to Take Action)




Fiscal Note: Staff cost estimated at less than $500 to implement.

Received: 04/30/08
Click to expand...

Interesting...
 
Last edited:
solumanculver said:
In what way do you think that psychiatrists are fake doctors?

It seems like the general rationale for opposing allied health professionals calling themselves doctors is the ambiguity of the word "doctor", not a way to demean the professions. The word "doctor" is a kind of appellative, so when you're talkig to someone who has a PhD you call them "doctor so-and-so". But in the third person when you say "so-and-so is a doctor", it means that "so-and-so is a physician".

Does that legislation address the appellative second-person sense, the third person sense, or both? It definitely seems like the third person sense should be illegal... It's obviously not appropriate to say "my english professor is a doctor", when you mean "my english professor has a doctorate".
Click to expand...


well nevermind, if they get their M.D. (which is what they have to do right?) they are doctors. I guess I said that because compared to the typical medical doctor, they may not do the same kinds of things

and it would make sense if the 3rd person is "illegal"
 
I guess I am just not understanding the issues or rationale here. Are psychologists introducing themselves and performing unnecessary surgeries or something.....:laugh: The only people that I will insist call me Dr. "So and So" are lawyers....🙂
 
Last edited:
I think that's pretty terrible, myself. Would you mind providing links so I can read about this (and responses to it) further?
 
I think it is understandable that they take steps to prevent patients misunderstanding the qualifications of the person they are seeing. The public tends to think 'MD' when they hear 'Dr' in certain contexts. For example, if I'm asked 'are you a doctor?' on an airplane I'd either say 'doctor of philosophy' or I'd say 'no' - I think it is safe to assume they are looking for a medical doctor. In a hospital if someone introduced themselves as 'Dr' I would assume MD rather than a doctoral degree in nursing. If one was a clinical neuropsychologist then introducing oneself as 'Dr' without further qualification would probably be appropriate, however. If I went to see a clinician for therapy I might well assume 'MD' as well - and assume prescribing ability.

I don't see any harm in calling oneself 'Dr' if one is in fact a Dr in those circumstances - so long as one explains a little so the person doesn't assume MD (as they tend to do). Sometimes... It simply isn't worth having to explain properly... So it is easier to refrain...
 
I work in a hospital and get confused as being a doctor all the time. And I don't even have the title yet 🙂 Most patients ask "so do you want to be a psychologist or psychiatrist?" I've had some ask me the difference. Others just get it. It really hasn't been a huge issue, so I'm not sure why it would mandate legislation. But that's just my experience. The APA ethics code certainly discusses our limits of professional conduct and how we are responsible for operating within those. I would think if there were any sign of confusion on the client's part about our "doctor" title it would be up to us to ensure they understood. Perhaps that's not happening as much as it should be?
 
myelin said:
Interesting...
Click to expand...

What does it mean to ban "the title" doctor? That seems like it means the appellative sense as well as the third person sense, but it's not clear. Is "Mr." a title? Is "Physician" a title?

As for protecting the terms "resident" and "residency", I'm not sure if we have as good an argument for that... Patients don't generally even know what a resident is. What do you guys think the source is for that?
 
I've heard that individuals with the Psy.D. degree are not allowed to be called doctor. Is this a rumor or what?
 
solumanculver said:
What does it mean to ban "the title" doctor? That seems like it means the appellative sense as well as the third person sense, but it's not clear. Is "Mr." a title? Is "Physician" a title?

As for protecting the terms "resident" and "residency", I'm not sure if we have as good an argument for that... Patients don't generally even know what a resident is. What do you guys think the source is for that?
Click to expand...

I'm hoping it's a joke...🙄
 
I have a sneaking suspicion this has much more to do with the DNP than it does with Ph.Ds/Psy.Ds. Frankly, it is up to the professional to correct any assumption or misunderstand of the patient. In the medical setting psychologists are frequent, and a simple clarification (if needed) of "psychologist" is not very hard.
 
Technically (according to the US DOEd), only persons with doctorates may correctly refer to themselves as "doctor". An MD/DO is a professional degree, akin to a JD, rather than a terminal doctorate, so MDs who refer to themselves as "doctor" are technically in the wrong. Legally, of course, this is not the case. This has been a pointless distinction 🙂
 
doctoroxygen said:
Technically (according to the US DOEd), only persons with doctorates may correctly refer to themselves as "doctor". An MD/DO is a professional degree, akin to a JD, rather than a terminal doctorate, so MDs who refer to themselves as "doctor" are technically in the wrong. Legally, of course, this is not the case. This has been a pointless distinction 🙂
Click to expand...

Hi, I don't think this is correct. An MD is a terminal doctorate, it's just not a research degree. Whether it is a professional or research doctorate is irrelevant with respect to the title "Doctor".

Are you also trying to argue that PsyDs aren't entitled to the title "Doctor"?

The real issue of who can call themselves "doctor" in which situations is simply linguistic. In the English language the noun "doctor" means "physician", while the title "doctor" is reserved for people with doctoral degrees. When allied health professionals use the title "doctor" in a medical setting it confuses patients. I would prefer it if we just scrapped the use of "doctor" as a noun and just called physicians "physicians", but that seems unlikely.

The problem is really not psychologists, though, it's more like "doctor of nurse practitioner" and "doctors of physical therapy"... these ad hoc professional doctorates were more-or-less cooked up for the simple reason that they legitimize the use of the title "doctor" in a medical setting, which has the effect of increasing the prestige of the holder incommensurately with their actual expertise.
 
solumanculver said:
Hi, I don't think this is correct. An MD is a terminal doctorate, it's just not a research degree. Whether it is a professional or research doctorate is irrelevant with respect to the title "Doctor".

Are you also trying to argue that PsyDs aren't entitled to the title "Doctor"?
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the issue is whether or not one has produced a dissertation, so a PsyD holder would technically be a "doctor", whereas a person with an MD or an JD (juris doctor), while those are terminal degrees, would not, as their education does not include a dissertation. This is not to detract in any way from medical education or the profession, and you're right about the noun "doctor" in everyday language.
 
This has been a BIG discussion on the div. 12 and 38 listserv's this week - and I recommend folks look up the archives of that discussion.

One primary argument is that the word 'doctor' originated in latin to mean 'teacher' not 'physician' - which few would argue to exclude psychologists.

The issue (IMO) is not so much a PhD versus PsyD one - but expands to greater issues of degredation of the field of psychology (especially with competition from MFTs, LCSWs, MSWs, etc.) and the lack of advocacy from APA.

Div. 38 is particularly opinionated on this because most members (given that it is health psych) are employed and active in medical communities/settings. It will speak volumes to our profession if we lose this title 'doctor.'
 
doctoroxygen said:
As I understand it, the issue is whether or not one has produced a dissertation, so a PsyD holder would technically be a "doctor", whereas a person with an MD or an JD (juris doctor), while those are terminal degrees, would not, as their education does not include a dissertation. This is not to detract in any way from medical education or the profession, and you're right about the noun "doctor" in everyday language.
Click to expand...

Hi, if the issue is truly one of producing a dissertation, then I suppose you're right. I don't think that there is any relation, though, between a degree being a "terminal doctorate" and the presence of a dissertation.

But inasmuch as the MD is terminal, and it is a doctorate, it seems like it should be considered a terminal doctorate... In countries where the MBBS degree is the entry-level medical degree, and which have the MD degree as the terminal doctorate, there may be a legitimate concern that MBBS physicians are inappropriately referring to themselves as "doctors", but in the US the entry level degree is also the terminal degree, so I think that our case is different.
 
Lunabin said:
One primary argument is that the word 'doctor' originated in latin to mean 'teacher' not 'physician' - which few would argue to exclude psychologists.
Click to expand...

I've heard this argument before, but it seems like a particularly bad one to me. The Latin etymology of a word is pretty irrelevant to its meaning in modern English, so I can't see how etymological arguments are going to solve this one.

The issue (IMO) is not so much a PhD versus PsyD one - but expands to greater issues of degredation of the field of psychology (especially with competition from MFTs, LCSWs, MSWs, etc.) and the lack of advocacy from APA.
Click to expand...

Do you mean to say that the title "doctor" is important to differentiate between psychologists and other mental health practitioners? I think that psychiatrists are making identical arguments about psychologists.

What do you think about nurse practitioners and physical therapists introducing themselves as "Dr. so-and-so"? Is there a way to prevent that while still allowing psychologists to introduce themselves in the same way? It seems like a line has to be drawn somewhere in the health-care field, otherwise every profession will introduce a professional doctorate ala DNP and DPT and everyone will be called "doctor". Then you might have just as much to fear from the "doctor of licensed clinical social work" rendering insignificant the difference in your education.
 
In my opinion, the argument from both sides is absurd. Why in the world should psychologists be concerned about whether or not the "Doctor" title is stripped away from them. If they were trying to restrict or limit what we could do clinically or research-wise, that would be a completely different ballgame, but this is just a title. Did anyone get into this profession so they could go home and tell their friends they are a doctor? Grow up! (I'm not refering to anyone specifically in this forum).

Secondly, the fact that medical physicians are pushing some legislation forward to strip away the title from us is grossly superficial and frankly, the medical community has more pressing issues, ESPECIALLY psychiatry. The fact that anyone in the medical community is wasting their time with such a petty isssue scares me. If I am overlooking something, please let me know, but the argument that some people are "confused" is absurd. Since when is the remedy to ignorance conforming to other people's misperception of what our field represent.
 
1) I belive that ALL professions/professionals should identify themselves by their title AND qualifications. I can't think of any of my colleagues, physicians or psychologist, that would want to present themselves as in another capacity. I know I would never want to be confused with a physician in a medical emergency. Judging by how fast my physician colleagues' eyes glaze over when i speak about what i do to arrive at my opinion, no MDs are vaguely interested in presenting themselves as psychologists.

2) This is not about psychologists, although it affects those of us who work in a medical setting. IMHO this is a move against alternative routes to doctoral medical training (i.e., DNP). I believe the APA will end up resolving this with the AMA. IMHO we were so far below the radar we weren't even considered when this was written. I believe this to be a professional gafffe that will easily be corrected.

3) Professional degrees are just as much "doctors" as research degrees. Psychologist, students thereof, etc would be well served by remaining respectful of all other doctoral degree holders. Except those crafty topologists. You can't trust those guys.

4) If we want to get held up on titles, we should look at the word. The applicable English definition according to Webster is " a: a person skilled or specializing in healing arts; especially : one (as a physician, dentist, or veterinarian) who holds an advanced degree and is licensed to practice b: medicine man"


Which conflicts with the original Greek stem "didaktor", meaning "to teach". Guess why we call classes "didactics"?

We should also remember that Surgeons were adressed as "Mister" in Great Britain in the recent past. This was not intended to disregard their training, but rather a reminder of the hertitage. I doubt patients got confused about the qualifications of the "Mr." who came in with his name and degree embroidered on the chest of his lab coat.

Again, qualifications count more than title. The only exception I can think of is "your honor".

5) This concept of title is constantly being discussed in the popular press. There was recently a case at the Max Planc institute in Germany wherein a PhD was told he had to qualify his title with "Professor Dr. SoandSo ". If I remember correctly, they all had a chuckle about it. No one thought they were physicians, but few doubted they were geniuses. Perhaps we should learn from this.
 
solumanculver said:
What do you think about nurse practitioners and physical therapists introducing themselves as "Dr. so-and-so"? Is there a way to prevent that while still allowing psychologists to introduce themselves in the same way?
Click to expand...
I still fall back to being up to the professional to be responsible for correcting a patient. All it really would take is a clarifying statement. "I'm doctor T4C, your Clinical Psychologist", "I'm Dr. Smith, your primary physician", and "I'm Dr. Jones, your Cardiologist".

This still goes back to the DNP and MDs/DOs fighting over turf. I happen to not agree with the DNP in how it is being presented, but that is neither here nor there. Unfortunately Psychology may get caught in the crossfire.
 
I heard that the American Medical Association (AMA) is trying to pass resolutions that the term "Doctor" should only be used by MDs. I would understand if they want to limit the use of the word "physicians" or "medical doctor", but "Doctor"? I don't know too much about this, but as a PhD just starting out, this really worries me.

Here is a link (Resolution 303), but it doesn't have a ton of details. Also, I've heard this for many other states, but I don't know which.
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/18588.html

Does anyone have any more info about this? Is the APA taking any action?
 
DVel said:
I heard that the American Medical Association (AMA) is trying to pass resolutions that the term "Doctor" should only be used by MDs. I would understand if they want to limit the use of the word "physicians" or "medical doctor", but "Doctor"? I don't know too much about this, but as a PhD just starting out, this really worries me.

Here is a link (Resolution 303), but it doesn't have a ton of details. Also, I've heard this for many other states, but I don't know which.
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/18588.html

Does anyone have any more info about this? Is the APA taking any action?
Click to expand...

Why does this worry you? Will it not impress your mother unless she confuses your schooling with medical school?
 
parto123 said:
Why does this worry you? Will it not impress your mother unless she confuses your schooling with medical school?
Click to expand...

This is a serious issue. Your comment was a poor attempt at a joke.

I am concerned because I spent many years of my life working towards a doctorate. I do not appreciate having someone tell me that suddenly I'm not a doctor. I am proud of my title and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
 
DVel said:
This is a serious issue. Your comment was a poor attempt at a joke.

I am concerned because I spent many years of my life working towards a doctorate. I do not appreciate having someone tell me that suddenly I'm not a doctor. I am proud of my title and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

No one is telling you youre not a doctor, just that you cant use that title in some locations.

Im not and MD, but im not not too proud to acknowledge that the title “doctor” derives most of its layman prestige from the fact that physicians use that title. If you earned a phd in psychology so that you will be able to become a psychologist then I don’t see why you would care about this, but if you wanted a phd so you could piggy back on the street prestige of medical doctors, then I see why you would have a problem with this. PS, as a side note, academic doctorates, are not social titles (unlike religious titles, judges or MDs) so any phd who goes by “doctor” in everyday life is misusing the term.
 
I just got this e-mail:

David Lichtman, MD, Chair
AMA Reference Committee C, Medical Education
c/o Roger Brown, Ph.D.
Director, Office of the House of Delegates Affairs
American Medical Association
515 N. State Street
Chicago, Il 60610

Re: American Medical Association House of Delegates Resolution 303 (A-08)
Restricted Use of the Titles "Doctor," "Resident," and "Residency"

Dear Dr. Lichtman,

The American Psychological Association ("APA") strongly urges the American Medical Association House of Delegates to oppose proposed Resolution 303, which seeks to restrict the title of "doctor," "resident," and "residency" in medical settings to apply only to physicians, dentists, and podiatrists. APA is the leading scientific and professional society
representing psychologists in the United States and is the world's largest association of doctorally trained psychologists, with more than 148,000 members and affiliates. Psychologists practice in all areas of health care and have a long history of using the title "doctor" in all medical settings, including hospitals, academic health centers, medical schools, clinics, and private offices.

Use of the term "doctor" recognizes psychologists' extensive education and training as well as their positions in medical settings as supervisors and managers of patient care at the highest level. Licensed psychologists spend an average of seven years, beyond college, in education and supervised training leading to licensure to practice psychology.
Psychologists complete extensive doctoral level training in the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders well beyond that which physicians receive. This training includes thousands of hours of supervised practice in psychology and a year of formal internship. Most psychologists also receive supervised post-doctoral training as one of the requirements for licensure. Psychologists are licensed to practice independently, free of physician supervision, in all 50 states and are recognized as independent practitioners by state and federal programs, including by Medicare and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Psychologists serve on the medical staffs of hundreds of hospitals, supervise treatment teams, and hold senior management positions at medical facilities. Psychologists are also routinely referred to as "doctor" in European and other
countries.

Psychologists who receive training in a specialty practice area are also referred to as "residents." They train in residencies housed in academic health centers, medical schools and other medical settings. These programs are accredited by the American Psychological Association, which is recognized as an accreditation agency by both the U.S. Department
of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation.

Proposed Resolution 303 would only confuse patients, who have used the word "doctor" to refer to psychologists in medical and mental health settings for decades. The term recognizes psychologists' extensive education and training and their high-level, independent management of patient care. APA strongly urges the American Medical Association House of Delegates to oppose Resolution 303.

Please feel free to contact Maureen Testoni at 202-336-5892 if you have any questions.

Sincerely,


Alan E. Kazdin, Ph.D. Norman B. Anderson, Ph.D.
APA President Chief Executive Officer
Click to expand...
 
parto123 said:
PS, as a side note, academic doctorates, are not social titles (unlike religious titles, judges or MDs) so any phd who goes by “doctor” in everyday life is misusing the term.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing, but what exactly do you mean by social title?


If you're just referring to the title of "Dr. so-and-so" being utilized outside of work, I'd be interested to know where you heard that because I've never heard anything like that before.
 
Wait, so Dr. would still apply to dentists? What about optometrists?
 
DVel said:
I am concerned because I spent many years of my life working towards a doctorate. I do not appreciate having someone tell me that suddenly I'm not a doctor.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's this kind of usage that's causing the problem. You are not "a doctor", you have a doctorate. A person with a doctorate is not called "a doctor". You have the appellative "doctor" in front of your name, but you're not "a doctor".

If it helps clear things up, priests have the appellative "father" in front of their names, but that doesn't mean that a priest is "a father". You wouldn't say "I was talking to a father the other day", you would say "I was talking to a priest the other day".
 
solumanculver said:
Actually, it's this kind of usage that's causing the problem. You are not "a doctor", you have a doctorate. A person with a doctorate is not called "a doctor". You have the appellative "doctor" in front of your name, but you're not "a doctor".

If it helps clear things up, priests have the appellative "father" in front of their names, but that doesn't mean that a priest is "a father". You wouldn't say "I was talking to a father the other day", you would say "I was talking to a priest the other day".
Click to expand...

That depends on how you operationally define "doctor." If you interpret a doctor as a "physician" then of course not. If you interpret a doctor as "one who is trained in the healing arts and is licensed to practice," then I beg to differ.
 
Last edited:
Ollie123 said:
Not disagreeing, but what exactly do you mean by social title?


If you're just referring to the title of "Dr. so-and-so" being utilized outside of work, I'd be interested to know where you heard that because I've never heard anything like that before.
Click to expand...

A PhD-doctor is an academic title, and technically should not be used in social settings (i.e. on wedding invites, when introducing oneself to people at a party etc.). This is the “official” rule of social etiquette (you can find this in cranes or any other established guides to etiquette). Also, the associated press, all notable newspapers, and university press only use the title “doctor” for MDs and not for PhDs.

From crane’s:
“My father has a Ph.D. does he use "Doctor" on my wedding invitations?
Ph.D. is an academic title that is used only in academic settings. The use of "Doctor" on wedding invitations is reserved for medical doctors and ministers with advanced degrees.”

From the associated press:
"Use Dr. in first reference as a formal title before the name of an individual who holds a doctor of dental surgery, doctor of medicine, doctor of osteopathy, or doctor of podiatric medicine degree”
 
Interesting - I guess what through me off is that it IS used as a formal title for a mailing address, etc. Or at least nearly everyone uses it that way - maybe all those folks are wrong in doing so, I never cared even the tiniest bit about the "official" etiquette guides so I'm sure you're right. In those "Mr, Mrs., Ms. or Dr." choices, would a Ph.D. still choose Dr.? I'm not sure where the line between social/professional is drawn.

Anyways, on the topic, for me personally at least, the point is moot. I can count on one hand the number of people I've worked with who actually went by "Dr.". I personally don't ever intend to (well...maybe for the sheer novelty of it the first week after I graduate😉 ). My only concern is that in my gut, I have a feeling it has little to do with concern for patients and is mostly about some folks' ego.
 
myelin said:
That depends on how you operationally define "doctor." If you interpret a doctor as a "physician" then of course not. If you interpret a doctor as "one who is trained in the healing arts and is licensed to practice," then I beg to differ.
Click to expand...

Well... it's not up to us to define words ourselves. The meaning of the word "doctor", used as a noun, implies "physician".

A psychologist can't say "I am a doctor" in normal company. Supposing that the psychologist was in some group of people that understand the term "doctor" to encompass anyone who is trained in healing arts, then he could say it, but in that context, the term "doctor" wouldn't have much meaning. A nurse practitioner could call themselves "doctor", or a physical therapist, or a respiratory therapist, or any other number of professions that are not encompassed by the term "doctor" in ordinary discourse.

The simple fact is that psychologists are not "doctors" and should never introduce themselves as such. They should introduce themselves as "psychologists", period. You can say, I am Dr. so-and-so, a psychologist... but to simply say "I am a doctor" is misleading and simply unethical.
 
I see what you're saying, though I must have missed the part where psychologists have been trying to pass themselves off as "doctors."

I see that you're a MD/PhD student. What will you call yourself when you're done?🙂
 
Last edited:
myelin said:
I see what you're saying, though I must have missed the part where psychologists have been trying to pass themselves off as "doctors." As well, using your logic, I should be ok to call an OB/GYN "one who works with vaginas" because that's what it implies, right? 😉
Click to expand...

It's definitely accurate to call gynecologists that, but probably not advisable.

I see that you're a MD/PhD student. What will you call yourself when you're done?🙂
Click to expand...

I'm not sure... The career path of an MD/PhD generally ends up at around a 20/80 clinical/research split. If someone were to ask me what I do for a living (in the far-flung future when I'm done with school), I suppose my answer would depend on what context they asked me in. If I was in a hospital I guess I'd say I was a doctor, but if I was somewhere else, I'd probably say I was a neuroscientist (or whatever).

Well, I would try to frame my answer in a way to clarify exactly what is was that I did, rather than to obfuscate, which I think is at the heart of the controversy of non-physicians calling themselves "doctors".
 
solumanculver said:
It's definitely accurate to call gynecologists that, but probably not advisable.



I'm not sure... The career path of an MD/PhD generally ends up at around a 20/80 clinical/research split. If someone were to ask me what I do for a living (in the far-flung future when I'm done with school), I suppose my answer would depend on what context they asked me in. If I was in a hospital I guess I'd say I was a doctor, but if I was somewhere else, I'd probably say I was a neuroscientist (or whatever).

Well, I would try to frame my answer in a way to clarify exactly what is was that I did, rather than to obfuscate, which I think is at the heart of the controversy of non-physicians calling themselves "doctors".
Click to expand...

You busted me on the OB/GYN comment. I thought I'd play nice so I deleted it.

Personally, I have no desire to foil or use chicanery to convince people that I am a medical doctor. As for psychologists, we're governed by the APA which is a similar ethical governing body as the AMA. Misrepresenting credentials and practicing outside of our area of expertise can result in censure or revocation of license. It is beyond me why a psychologist or any other PhD level clinician, "doctor," etc. would spend 5+ years of their life in school only to loose it by misrepresenting themselves. It's quite a presumptious and egotistical statement by the individuals who've submitted this legislation. It's quite ironic that they request the term "doctor" to be used in a medical setting, but forgot to define what a medical setting consists of. A hospital? Private practice? A psych unit? Furthermore, it increases the barriers between healthcare professionals which does not favor the patient.

I see their point, but they did a rather poor job of explaining what this legislation will entail to other healthcare professionals down the line.
 
This is ridiculous-- one field can't just announce that they can claim a title for themselves when other fields have used it for years. It's not about "impressing our parents," but it does have something to do with impact that the title has on patients, and amongst colleagues. We would always be second-class citizens in the medical field if this went through. It's called a DOCTORate for a reason. Beyond the term "doctor," I've heard some internship sites calling interns residents because it commands more respect and because the term is more closely analogous to that of the medical field, which is VERY hierarchical and for whom "intern" means something else entirely. As for the distinction between "Dr." and "Doctor," very few people would understand this. Besides, most psychologists do correct people from the perception that they are medical doctors, as is ethically required.

As annoying as this idea is, I'm not super concerned. I don't think it will go through. The AMA can't just go to congress and announce how it wants to do things. And I don't think that the intention is to exclude psychologists-- more to exclude doctors of nursing. Which still bugs me, you know-- the medical profession needs to understand that theirs is not the only valid model of training.
 
parto123 said:
No one is telling you youre not a doctor, just that you cant use that title in some locations.

Im not and MD, but im not not too proud to acknowledge that the title “doctor” derives most of its layman prestige from the fact that physicians use that title. If you earned a phd in psychology so that you will be able to become a psychologist then I don’t see why you would care about this, but if you wanted a phd so you could piggy back on the street prestige of medical doctors, then I see why you would have a problem with this. PS, as a side note, academic doctorates, are not social titles (unlike religious titles, judges or MDs) so any phd who goes by “doctor” in everyday life is misusing the term.
Click to expand...

So you're basically saying that I shouldn't be able to use the title in professional or social settings, yet "no one is telling [me] that [I'm] not a doctor".

I've worked in medical setting for years I have absolutely no desire to have people confuse me for a medical doctor. That's very presumptuous of you to believe that everyone shares your idea that anyone would want to be medical doctors. In both social and professional settings, I always say I have a PhD in psychology. Subsequently, people call me Dr. so and so because that's what they're used to calling people with PhDs. If this resolution passes, am I supposed to correct them and say, nope, I'm just Ms. so and so because the AMA has decided to monopolize the title despite the historical and practical use of the word?
 
Yes, optometrists, and even chiropractors (who go to 4 years of schooling including grad training) will still be able to use the term "doctor." I think it's funny that some people on here are telling us that it is not socially acceptable to use the term "doctor" lest we be confused with the superior MDs....
 
parto123 said:
A PhD-doctor is an academic title, and technically should not be used in social settings (i.e. on wedding invites, when introducing oneself to people at a party etc.). This is the “official” rule of social etiquette (you can find this in cranes or any other established guides to etiquette). Also, the associated press, all notable newspapers, and university press only use the title “doctor” for MDs and not for PhDs.

From crane’s:
“My father has a Ph.D. does he use "Doctor" on my wedding invitations?
Ph.D. is an academic title that is used only in academic settings. The use of "Doctor" on wedding invitations is reserved for medical doctors and ministers with advanced degrees.”

From the associated press:
"Use Dr. in first reference as a formal title before the name of an individual who holds a doctor of dental surgery, doctor of medicine, doctor of osteopathy, or doctor of podiatric medicine degree”
Click to expand...

I don't think this is generally right. Maybe there are sources here or there that say this (I couldn't verify your AP source- I will check that out next time I'm near a style guide). But I checked out a bunch of wedding etiquette sites, for example, and all the ones I found said that Ph.D.s should be addressed as "Dr." or "Doctor" on invitations. Here's an example from Emily Post's site (http://www.emilypost.com/everyday/forms_of_address.htm):

A woman who outranks her husband:
professional or educational degree
Dr. Jane Kelly and Mr. John Kelly
Both are doctors (PhD or medical) and use the same last name
The Doctors Kelly (omit first names)
Drs. Jane and John Kelly / Drs. John and Jane Kelly
Dr. John Kelly and Dr. Jane Kelly / Dr. Jane Kelly and Dr. John Kelly
Both are doctors (PhD or medical), she uses her maiden name
Dr. Jane Johnson and Dr. John Kelly
Dr. John Kelly and Dr. Jane Johnson

In addition, the New York Times, one of the only modern newspapers to consistently use salutations in articles, refers to Ph.D.'s as Dr. (e.g., http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/n...e.html?scp=5&sq=dr.+ph.d.+psychologist&st=nyt).

And if you're curious about the historical usage of the term doctor, which as many have noted was previously limited to Ph.D.s until it was appropriated by MDs, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr.
 
solumanculver said:
The simple fact is that psychologists are not "doctors" and should never introduce themselves as such. They should introduce themselves as "psychologists", period.
Click to expand...

Your tone is rather rude, and implies that not only physicians are trying to claim the title for themselves (and we already know "doctor" stems from academia, as physicians were a trade that chose to adopt "doctor" later on), but that they are some how better than other professions who have DOCTORate training. I think I will agree to disagree, because I think the above is asinine.
 
To be fair, I think his problem is not with the "title" Dr. since he said previously introducing yourself as "Dr. so and so" is fine. His point seems to be that psychologists should not say "I'm a doctor" if asked what they do. I actually agree on that point (it seems like everyone does), but 1) I don't know of anyone who actually does this, and 2) That isn't what the actual bill is written to do.
 
Ollie123 said:
To be fair, I think his problem is not with the "title" Dr. since he said previously introducing yourself as "Dr. so and so" is fine. His point seems to be that psychologists should not say "I'm a doctor" if asked what they do. I actually agree on that point (it seems like everyone does), but 1) I don't know of anyone who actually does this, and 2) That isn't what the actual bill is written to do.
Click to expand...

The problem is, I think Resolution 303 is not clear enough to make these kind of subtle distinctions. I think it can easily exclude the title "Dr." as well as "doctor".

Also, even if Dr. and doctor are distinguished, I still consider myself a real "doctor" with a doctorate. I will not misrepresent myself as a medical doctor in any setting, just as an anesthesiologist should not try to misrepresent himself as a dermatologist, podiatrist or whatever. It's clear such misrepresentations are covered within our code of ethics. We have doctorates and "doctor" should not be limited to M.D.s and the few other arbitrarily decided doctoral degrees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mind_over_matter277
Has anyone worked in a VA Residential Treatment Program?
Replies
8
Views
327
mind_over_matter277
mind_over_matter277
BuckeyeLove
The Open Therapy Institute - Anyone heard of this org???
Replies
38
Views
3K
WisNeuro
WisNeuro
S
Has anyone in SC taken the oral exam?
Replies
4
Views
1K
GT_Neuro
G
P
Working when experiencing your own crisis
Replies
13
Views
2K
psychma
P
B
This can’t be ethical?
Replies
48
Views
3K
chicandtoughness
chicandtoughness
Top