Should nurses or physician assistants call themselves doctors if…

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

FutureDrB

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
918
Reaction score
297
With the introduction of the Doctor of Nursing degree and similar doctoral programs, I was wondering what everyones opinion was concerning the issue of nurses and other health professionals who provide direct care to patients introducing themselves as “Dr. So and So”.

I’ve read a few articles where medical doctors are claiming that it is causing confusion among patients…some physicians oppose it and some do not mind.

The same question applies to physician assistants and the like. For example, if a physician assistant holds a Ph.D. in Public Health, Education, or some other discipline, should they introduce themselves to patients as “Dr. So and So”?

Members don't see this ad.
 
I have a PhD in the biomedical sciences and am hoping to return to school to become a Nurse Practitioner. I do not plan to introduce myself to patients/clients as "Dr." Having a PhD, I am used to the informality in my field and I can't see myself suddenly acting formal, as MDs tend to do. Also, in the NP specialty I hope to pursue, practitioners usually go by their first name with clients. Plus, there is the confusion issue, as Future mentioned. So, all in all, I don't plan to use "Dr." with clients. (I'll reserve "Dr." for job applications and hi-falutin' social occasions. :) )
 
I believe it is almost a violation of the law (borderline) to introduce yourself to a patient as a "Dr." if you don't have medical school training. The assumed meaning in the minds of most patients is "MD," and posing as an MD without having one used to be called practicing medicine without a license. It actually shouldn't be presented as a preference to decide whether or not to call oneself "Dr." with an auxiliary degree. Hospitals and clinics should expressly disallow it. You really don't want a patient considering the advice of someone with a PhD in health management or biochemistry to be equal to the advice of an MD in a medical sense. You also don't want a nurse with a PhD in health management trying to lead a crash team rather than an MD as a "Dr." because he/she thinks a couple extra letters behind their name makes them qualified to do so, rather than actually having the body of knowledge, the malpractice coverage, the level of responsibility, and the experience to handle the situation. There is a simple reason our education takes a lot longer than that of an NP or PA - on the whole, we are entrusted with more knowledge and responsibility. That is no slap to NPs or PAs - it is just a respect for the value of a medical school education - a respect many people don't seem to have any longer. The content of PhD education may or may not relay additional knowledge to the degree holder that is directly useful in seeing a patient. That's why the content of the MD degree is standardized and followed by standardized exams. Oh, and MDs behave formally because it is a serious business. You have to be on your toes and constantly thinking about what a patient tells you so as not to miss something important. Seeing a patient is not a coffee break for donuts and catching up on sports scores. If somebody becomes an NP, great, let them practice in their field under the direction of a physician. But, they shouldn't try to sell themselves as better than a physician because they spend more time with their patients or are friendlier to them (I have actually heard NPs implicate this) - that's just a facade and not an adequate replacement for more competence. Being an NP with a PhD in history isn't quite the same as being an MD, and it shouldn't be presented to patients as such. It's really just that plain. Most hospitals require name badges with big letters "MD," "RN," etc, expressly for these reasons of confusion. A medical environment might be confusing enough (eg, an ER) without having to try to figure out who's who, who should be in charge, etc.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
RGMSU, it sounds like we're in agreement that non-MD practitioners should be clear with patients that they are not MDs.

In the field I'm going into--psych--it is common for PhD psychologists who provide services such as psychotherapy to clients to go by "doctor." (Some go by first name, of course, but if they are going to use a title with their clients, they use "Dr.", not "Mr." or "Ms.") I'm not commenting on the appropriateness of this or not, just making an observation about a longstanding practice.

Even though I will have the "doctor" title due to my PhD, and I will be a licensed therapist in addition to being a Psych-NP, my plan is not to use the title "Dr." I do think the potential for confusion with clients is real and I wouldn't want to promote that. Since I want to encourage a close client relationship, I am sure I will most likely go by my first name, which is common among those who provide psychotherapy. RGMSU, if MDs want to be formal, then that is just fine--I have no beef with it. I come from a different tradition (academic) and don't plan to change to being more formal. Since I'm not going to be an MD, why would I? :) If it comes up, I will share with my clients that my advanced knowledge of pharmacology due to my PhD and postdoctoral work helps me keep up to date on mechanisms of drug action and so is beneficial when prescribing. But I can have that little conversation without using the "Dr." title.

By the way, in my state, a Psych-NP does not have to practice under an MD.

I'm curious about the extent of the problem FutureDB raised. Are a lot of clinicians who are not MDs introducing themselves to patients as "Dr."? (outside of PhD psychologists, where it is common) Do hospitals have regulations against it? (Sample size of two: I have seen two NPs in the course of my own healthcare and neither went by "Dr.")
 
In a clinical setting, absolutely not and it can not be justified. In an academic or social setting, flaunt your degree all you want.
 
Hah, well I might sound like I'm contradicting myself, but I actually don't have a problem with a psychologist being called "Dr." in a setting that is specifically psychological, though I can see where it might be a problem in a hospital. The clinical psychology PhD is based upon a specific clinical body of knowledge, therefore the credential is relevant to their therapeutic activities. The clinical psych/NP combo is a new one to me. I have not encountered anybody pursuing that before. I'm not arrogant about the title "Dr.," but if you were in a medical psych ward where a patient might have a medical problem (eg, a neurological comorbidity, medical detox for substance abuse) or where you might have a medical emergency arise from such a situation, I would think it would be inappropriate to be identified as a "Dr." It's for your own protection as much as for the patient. If you attempted to respond to a medical situation as a "Dr." that fell outside your purview, you could certainly be legally liable for your actions and for portraying yourself as someone appropriate to respond to the situation. So, I think a psychologist or a psychologist/NP using the title "Dr." in their own office is perfectly fine as long as they are practicing under their purview, which they would be if they were behaving professionally. In a hospital, even a psych hospital, I would think it inappropriate to use the term "Dr.," though some probably do. For example, in the event of a physiological emergency with drug detox, a psychiatrist would be prepared to respond to the situation by virtue of their medical training, whereas a psychologist would not. A psychologist/NP would be appropriate to command an emergency response team in a psych hospital if a psychiatrist or other MD was not present, by virtue of their training as an NP, not as a psychologist. So, again, in certain contexts it would cause confusion. You wouldn't want a nurse grabbing you as a "Dr." trying to respond to a medical emergency, and you wouldn't want a patient taking your advice on a non-psychological issue as a "Dr." That's all I'm really talking about here. As far as NPs practicing without supervision, I am against it. I think it is good to have the safety net of a physician behind you. Simple things can often be much more complex than they seem. Mistakes are made by physicians all the time - misdiagnoses, wrong therapeutic decisions based on misdiagnoses - so they're going to be made by NPs as well. I would hope that an NP or a psychologist would recognize the rigorous training an MD endures and use an MD as a resource for consultation rather than trying to always go it alone. It is harder to seek an MD for consultation if you are practicing independently - they are just not as readily available to you. There are plenty of things that a family doc is going to know that an NP might not know or that a psychiatrist might know that a psychologist might not, and vice versa. I actually think that any psychologist who wants to prescribe should do something like you're doing - become an NP, PA, or even an MD to do it. It's just essential to have that body of medical/scientific knowledge behind you in addition to the psychological knowledge, in my opinion.

As to the last part of your question, I have seen pharmacists (not PharmD's) and PA's (not PhD's) erroneously called "Dr." by patients, and they did not correct the patient in saying they were not a "Dr." I believe that to be a misrepresentation of one's credentials. If someone called me a psychologist, I would correct them and tell them I am not qualified nor licensed to be called such, so I don't see why it should be any different for someone who is not a physician to correct a patient in telling them they are not an MD. In clinics, I have not seen the rigorous use of name badges, but that will vary by clinic, and typically the types of situations handled in clinics as well as peoples' familiarity with each other is different from the hospital setting. In hospitals, again, definitely you have badges that typically prominently display "MD" or "RN." In an emergency, there is no time for democracy, so there has to be an MD step forward if one is available and command the ship. People getting confused about who's who and who's giving advice for what is not a good situation for hospital liability, so they protect against it pretty cautiously.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad everyone is providing such good feedback.

I originally posed this question in response to an article I read about the new "Doctor of Nursing" degree that some nurses now hold.

The article provided feedback from several medical doctors who had differing opinions on nurses who held the Doctor of Nursing degree introducing themselves as "Dr. So and So."

I certainly agree that a NP or PA who does not hold a doctoral degree should certainly not introduce themselves as Dr. or even let a patient accidentally refer to them as doctor without correcting them. This is bound to cause confusion and could as one of the above posters said, potentially cause a dangerous situation in an emergency.

I'm not sure how I feel about Nurses or Physician Assistants who also hold doctorate degrees introducing themselves as doctors. It is of course acceptable in educational settings, but debatable in clinical settings. On one side I understand the potential confusion, but on the other side, in theory they have earned the right to call themselves doctors.

I think one solution might be to enforce all health professionals to introduce themselves, along with their specialty…like most do now. For example…"Hello Jim, I'm Dr. Jones, a cardiologist, internist, pediatrician, etc. here in the ER."

The same could apply to a nurse if that nurse insisted on calling themself a doctor…although it sounds a bit funny…"Hello Jim, I'm Dr. Jones, a pediatric nurse here in the ER." Technically, they are specifying that they are a nurse, but possess a doctorate.

This topic slightly hits home for me since I have changed my career path from pursuing a medical degree to finishing my Ph.D. in Human Nutrition. I will then be a Registered Dietician with a Ph.D. and plan to introduce myself to my patients as Dr.

However, my situation is a bit different since my specialty is in and of itself, so my patients already know I'm a clinical dietitian and not a medical doctor. Although introducing myself as Dr. will hopefully instill more confidence in my patients that I am an expert in my field.

Hopefully this discussion will continue, I appreciate everyones feedback.
 
I've worked in several hospital-based PM&R settings and the psychologists there introduced themselves to patients as, "I'm Dr. XX. I'm a psychologist and blah, blah...." Never any confusion or problems that I was aware of.
 
About 90% of patients don't have the first damn clue about what a cardiologist or an internist is. If you introduce yourself as "Dr.," they think all doctors are the same. Call yourself whatever you want. I'm just warning some of you folks who apparently don't know much about medicine - if you offer medical advice to someone and you have advertised yourself to them as a "Dr.," then you can be held legally liable for that advice. So, proceed at your own risk. It won't be any problem of mine when you get sued for dispensing advice you had no training to dispense. Ex - patient goes to a dietician. Dietician informs patient about some herbal supplement. Herbal supplement interferes with prescription med patient is on. Dietician could be held liable if the patient has enough sense to sue. That's the real world of medicine instead of the TV nonsense. Why do you think docs always cover their asses? Another ex - patient goes to psychologist. Psychologist pretends to be a psychiatrist and prescribes drugs to a patient with neurological comorbidities, say epilepsy. Anti-epileptic medication levels are altered by the drugs prescribed by the psychologist through interaction. Epileptic patient goes into status epilepticus and dies. Said psychologist will likely never practice again, unless they move to another state with a blind board. There's a reason medical school is hard, because practicing medicine is hard. You can't just wake up one day with training that is not equivalent to that of a physician and expect to be able to handle cases like a physician. My prediction, though, is that as soon as a few people playing doc get sued to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars - like real docs get sued when they screw up - there won't be nearly as many people wanting to play doc.

My advice to folks getting online PhDs in psychology and whatnot and then walking around with their white lab coats on pretending to be physicians - get yourself some good malpractice insurance, because you're likely to need it as soon as lawyers develop the same gleam in their eye for you as they have for MDs. I have known MDs who have gotten totally wiped out financially and professionally over a single mistake. The flippant attitude some people have on these forums about the practice of medicine is a bit frightening honestly, and it shows a great deal of naiveness.
 
Last edited:
Ex - patient goes to a dietician. Dietician informs patient about some herbal supplement. Herbal supplement interferes with prescription med patient is on. Dietician could be held liable if the patient has enough sense to sue. That's the real world of medicine instead of the TV nonsense.

While I appreciate your feisty response and your claim that only medical doctors are qualified to dispense medical advice…before you make these claims you might educate yourself on the various fields of medicine.

Registered Dietitians play a crucial role in the care of patients and are almost always the recommended health care professional a patient sees if that patient is suffering from diabetes, obesity, or some other ailment of dietary nature.

In regards to your comment about dietitians getting in trouble for advising patients to take an herbal remedy that may conflict with their prescription medication…

A dietitian’s job in no way entails recommending herbal supplements/remedies to patients and the practice of clinical dietetics and/or medical nutrition therapy has nothing to do with herbal or “natural” medicine. The first thing a dietitian would do is investigate any and all medications a patient was taking before tailoring a specific diet plan.

It appears you are a medical student so I have to assume that your are quite intelligent. I would hope that before you finish med school and start practicing medicine “in the real world” as you put it…you recognize that the practice of medicine goes far beyond the medical doctors themselves…whether it be the nurses, dietitians, CNAs, physician assistants, or other healthcare professionals you will be working alongside.
 
I get really sick of arguing with people on here, particularly people who aren't advanced enough in their education yet to know what the hell they're talking about. To reiterate, I was referring to the reality that commentary from a non-physician could be perceived by a patient to be commentary equal to that of a physician, and it could in fact contradict advice that one would receive from a physician. I appreciate your respect for dieticians, but with all due respect they are not pharmacists either, so I doubt their "review of a patients' medicines" would be all that well-informed from a pharmacological perspective either. They play a fine role in helping to develop diet plans and whatnot, but honestly there are much more serious concerns with chronic patients that they should choose not to comment on because of their lack of real medical knowledge. Again, I don't try to portray myself as a dietician, nor do I try to encroach on their field, so why does everybody want to encroach on the physician's and/or pretend to be one? I believe I am fairly aware of medical practice in the real world, and its multiple troubles at the moment that I choose to comment on here. What you will find as you move from being an idealistic pre-med to a med student is that there are attempts afloat to utterly and totally upend the medical system and the position of physicians, many of them supported by some of the auxiliary workers you're referring to. So, before you get too much respect for them, check to make sure how much respect they have for you as a future physician. You might be surprised how little physicians are respected in the medical world now. I don't think you realize that with decreased reimbursement and the groundswell of mutiny among mid-levels, many physicians are likely to be put in the position of fighting for the uniqueness of their jobs and fighting for a significant income to maintain themselves appropriately for their positions. When mid-levels start antagonizing physicians, they shouldn't be surprised to get some blowback. It's not like we all train for 12 years and take out $200,000 in debt only to allow someone with half the education to come in and take over our roles. It's great to have help, but when it becomes replacement rather than help, there is a problem. As far as the one dude who seems to be arguing that physicians shouldn't practice defensive medicine in America, I'm not even going to go there. Anybody who has any experience whatsoever with American medicine knows they really have no choice on this one.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
[SIZE=3
[FONT=Arial]This topic slightly hits home for me since I have changed my career path from pursuing a medical degree to finishing my Ph.D. in Human Nutrition. I will then be a Registered Dietician with a Ph.D. and plan to introduce myself to my patients as Dr.

Just to clarify, assuming you are in the United States, your Ph.D. in Human Nutrition would be unrelated to your passing the exam to become a Registered Dietitian (note correct US spelling of dietitian). In order to sit for this exam, you must complete a clinical course as mandated by the appropriate dietetic boards. A Ph.D. in human nutrition is a research, not a clinical degree and without doing your clinical dietetics training and passing the certifying exam, you are not eligible to be called an RD.

Many nutritional scientists are "RD, Ph.Ds" and it is certainly possible to do both. Because practicing clinical dietetics does not require an advanced degree (MS, RD is common though), it is uncommon, but not unheard of, for an RD, Ph.D. to be directly doing patient dietary work (not research related) in a hospital or outpatient setting. When you get to that point, we can discuss whether when having direct patient interactions related to diets (not research studies), if you plan to introduce yourself as "doctor."
 
”Hello Jim, I’m Dr. Jones, a pediatric nurse here in the ER.” Technically, they are specifying that they are a nurse, but possess a doctorate.

I think most patients would do a double-take if someone did actually introduce themselves like that.
 
I think most patients would do a double-take if someone did actually introduce themselves like that.

I think most patients would go to another ER staffed by an MD next time - IF they had any sense, which some don't.
 
It appears you are a medical student so I have to assume that your are quite intelligent. I would hope that before you finish med school and start practicing medicine “in the real world” as you put it…you recognize that the practice of medicine goes far beyond the medical doctors themselves…whether it be the nurses, dietitians, CNAs, physician assistants, or other healthcare professionals you will be working alongside.

Yes, in the real world, hard-working medical doctors will have to deal with giant egos like you, and make you feel included and part of the team of "doctors" (where everyone who speaks to a patient is a "doctor").

Read your post again and look at how condescending you are to RGMSU for stating his opinion that in the clinical setting doctors should refer to the traditional understanding of medical doctors, vets, and dentists. This should be made a Law in the House of God: Those who accuse medical doctors for having big egos generally have far larger ones themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks to all for their input. I wish everyone the best of luck in their future endeavors.
 
I will just reiterate that I have great respect for NPs, PAs, dieticians, whoever. I just don't think they should take over my job or my title unless they are going to complete the same training myself and my colleagues have dedicated ourselves to. The nature of my posts was to try to show how frustrating it is for physicians that no one has respect for their level of education anymore. Because of all the frustrations of fighting with other healthcare workers, patients, insurance companies, and the government, my advice to pre-meds considering med school is - please, don't waste your time. I honestly wouldn't do it again. The whole thing about egos with physicians and med students is largely nonsense. I think many of us feel more overworked, downtrodden, and underappreciated than we do egotistical.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I will just reiterate that I have great respect for NPs, PAs, dieticians, whoever. I just don't think they should take over my job or my title unless they are going to complete the same training myself and my colleagues have dedicated ourselves to. The nature of my posts was to try to show how frustrating it is for physicians that no one has respect for their level of education anymore. Because of all the frustrations of fighting with other healthcare workers, patients, insurance companies, and the government, my advice to pre-meds considering med school is - please, don't waste your time. I honestly wouldn't do it again. The whole thing about egos with physicians and med students is largely nonsense. I think many of us feel more overworked, downtrodden, and underappreciated than we do egotistical.

I completely agree with you in that most doctors are no longer viewed in the same way as before. This is another one of the major reasons for me changing career paths before applying to med school. Granted, I’m now looking at a max salary of $65-$80K vs. six figures as a physician, but it’s not about the money anyway.

After volunteering, shadowing, and talking to several doctors and being submerged in the medical atmosphere for some time now, I quickly realized that the medical profession is drastically different than most people think. I’m afraid ER and Grey’s Anatomy don’t exactly cover the scope of real-life medicine.

With all the ridiculous competition of getting into medical school to begin with, then the bureaucracy and headache of dealing with insurance companies, regulations, etc. the doctors I spoke to shared your sentiments exactly…the majority of them said they loved their jobs, but would never do it again if they had it to do over.

I do hope other premeds, as well as the general public take the time to truly educate themselves before they choose a career in medicine. or make any statements about the healthcare profession.
 
I completely agree with you in that most doctors are no longer viewed in the same way as before. This is another one of the major reasons for me changing career paths before applying to med school. Granted, I’m now looking at a max salary of $65-$80K vs. six figures as a physician, but it’s not about the money anyway.

After volunteering, shadowing, and talking to several doctors and being submerged in the medical atmosphere for some time now, I quickly realized that the medical profession is drastically different than most people think. I’m afraid ER and Grey’s Anatomy don’t exactly cover the scope of real-life medicine.

With all the ridiculous competition of getting into medical school to begin with, then the bureaucracy and headache of dealing with insurance companies, regulations, etc. the doctors I spoke to shared your sentiments exactly…the majority of them said they loved their jobs, but would never do it again if they had it to do over.

I do hope other premeds, as well as the general public take the time to truly educate themselves before they choose a career in medicine. or make any statements about the healthcare profession.

You are very wise, my friend, very wise indeed. Take the 80k/year and run like hell. Better yet, become a pharmacist, make 105k/year working at Target, work 40 hours/week, and enjoy your time off. Don't worry about what title people use to refer to you, don't worry about prestige - all that crap is overrated, and life is much too short. The only reason I care to be a physician is (1) I enjoy seeing patients and (2) I enjoy thinking about medicine. But, again, if I weren't already in it, I wouldn't do it again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I will just reiterate that I have great respect for NPs, PAs, dieticians, whoever. I just don't think they should take over my job or my title unless they are going to complete the same training myself and my colleagues have dedicated ourselves to. The nature of my posts was to try to show how frustrating it is for physicians that no one has respect for their level of education anymore. Because of all the frustrations of fighting with other healthcare workers, patients, insurance companies, and the government, my advice to pre-meds considering med school is - please, don't waste your time. I honestly wouldn't do it again. The whole thing about egos with physicians and med students is largely nonsense. I think many of us feel more overworked, downtrodden, and underappreciated than we do egotistical.

I respect the crap that physicians have to deal with to get in school, during school, and when they start practice. And when I finish my psych NP program, I want a big dog backing me up.

I saw a story on CNN the other day about an ob-gyn who paid over $150 grand a year for malpractice. She was delivering a baby, had a uterine rupture and barely saved both mother and baby. Of course she couldn't wake the lady up to ask permission to take out her uterus in order to save her life. She canceled patients for the next few days in order to stay at the patient's bedside. Later, the patient sued. Doctor won but damn.....what's with people?
 
I saw a story on CNN the other day about an ob-gyn who paid over $150 grand a year for malpractice. She was delivering a baby, had a uterine rupture and barely saved both mother and baby. Of course she couldn't wake the lady up to ask permission to take out her uterus in order to save her life. She canceled patients for the next few days in order to stay at the patient's bedside. Later, the patient sued. Doctor won but damn.....what's with people?

Well, thankfully the doctor won...

Doesn't surprise me at all... I don't know what is with people now days. Everyone is so quick to sue no matter what the situation. Lazy people I suppose looking for an easy dollar…

GO TORT REFORM!! I'm probably going to start another debate here, but I wish more people realized that that’s why insurance premiums are so high. Has little to do with doctors charging too much, insurance companies being greedy, etc. If insurance companies didn't have to protect themselves against these frivolous lawsuits, insurance premiums would obviously be lower.

What cracks me up is these people who complain about high insurance premiums are the same ones who spend $5 a day on cigarettes or a cheeseburger meal instead of using that same $5 on health insurance.

And, as soon as someone makes a mistake…SUE!! Whether it’s a car accident, slipping in the store, or some medical mistake. I sure wish there were more rational people in the world…but like mommy always said…it’s ok to dream.

My grandmother got breast cancer about 10 years ago… turns out her previous doctor didn’t see the mass in an an x-ray 2 years prior to that…of course the majority of people were like SUE THAT DOCTOR!! Her answer…why in the world would I sue him, he made a mistake…too bad more people don’t realize people make mistakes, even doctors.

Granted, if something happens during surgery or what have you and this prevents me from providing financially for my family, I am going to want an amount significant to what I lost over the course of my working lifetime…probably in the $1 million dollar range…but these people who have a sponge left in them or something and get awarded $20 million…ridiculous.
 
I agree that the field is becoming more and more complex with the new addition of so many doctorates. With the fairly new Doctorates in Nursing, Physical Therapy, Audiology, etc., it can become confusing to providers and patients alike as to the medical doctors and the academic doctors. It is the care providers ethical responsibility to make sure their Patients know the difference.

Keep in mind that doctorates have a very long history and some would argue that from a historical perspective there were "academic" doctorates before there were "medical" doctorates.

I am a psychologist and I have a PhD in psychology. I call myself a doctor as I earned a doctorate in psychology. My doctorate is no less rigorous than a medical doctorate as it takes an average 11 years to licensure for psychologists. I have no idea what it takes to get a doctorate in other fields but I assume that they are not easy and they don't come out of a candy machine. I introduce myself as "Hi, I'm Doctor X, and I am psychologist here in the hospital." If they ask what a psychologist is, I often tell them I am a "brain doctor" rather than a "body doctor." Everyone gets that differentiation. It makes it easier as I work on a behavioral health unit for them to understand that I am behavioral health. Whenever I interact with people, I always explain the differences between a psychologist and psychiatrist. It makes it easier on them as they don't expect therapy from the psychiatrist and they don't expect medication from me. Most people know the basic differences in care providers. Most medical doctors I know say "Hi, I'm Dr. X and I am your physician." They seldom refer to themselves only as a "Doctor" but rather as a physician.

In response to an earlier post, I would hope no one is trying to come off as a "Doctor" in any field if they do not have the proper education, training, and licensure.

I also understand the poster's frustration as he/she sees their field being devalued and their training not being appreciated. I hear denigrating comments about physicians quite often. For some reason, maybe a long time ago, physicians had a tendency to come off as a know it all - some still do but that is less and less. As a result, I think people really do expect physicians to know it all and when they don't...because they are human...the Patients think they are less than.

Just my two cents...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If they ask what a psychologist is, I often tell them I am a "brain doctor" rather than a "body doctor." Everyone gets that differentiation.

If someone told me they are a "brain doctor," I would think neurologist or neurosurgeon, not psychologist. My two cents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
If someone told me they are a "brain doctor," I would think neurologist or neurosurgeon, not psychologist. My two cents.


Well, that is what I think of as well when I personally think of a "brain" doctor. Since I work with both, I am aware of the nuances of each profession, but only by my own personal exposure. However, most people don't have any idea what a neurologist or a neurosurgeon is (they think that is a "brain" surgeon). Don't even start talking to people about what a neurophysiologist is!!

Within the context of what I do, by working in a behavioral health unit, it makes sense to Patients. If I were to say that in a strictly medical setting, they may think something different and I probably wouldn't use that term. Of course, when I introduce myself as being from mental health I have to work on the "no, you aren't crazy and no, that isn't why they called me" before I can do anything. Having psych people show up is not normally expected in a general medical setting.

I am often required to go beyond "I'm a psychologist" because most people don't really know what that is either.

Is it a perfect differentiation, no, of course not. However, it gets my point across that people should not be coming to me whenever the ambulance shows up.

Believe me, I don't want to be mistaken for a physician. I wouldn't do your job for all the tea in China. Talk about an often thankless gig that is often used as a punching bag by their "allied" colleagues, Patients, and politicians alike.
 
Anybody who has a doctoral degree is eligible to be called "doctor." They just have to be careful how they market themselves in terms of what the scope of their practice is. This is just as true for a physician trying to comment on things that aren't a part of their specialty. What is so special about being called "doctor" anyway? Who cares?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Believe me, I don't want to be mistaken for a physician. I wouldn't do your job for all the tea in China. Talk about an often thankless gig that is often used as a punching bag by their "allied" colleagues, Patients, and politicians alike.

Hah, how do you have such a good understanding of medicine?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Hah, how do you have such a good understanding of medicine?
Different subject but I just got out of the military and I would like to end up being a PA. I'm using my GI bill and I'm going to North Harris to get all my electives out of the way before going to a real college. I've always wanted to go to Texas A&M. From what I have gathered (correct me if I'm wrong), if you get a bachelors degree in nursing, you will be able to go to the two year school to become a PA. Am I wrong in this? Does Texas A&M have a good nursing school? I heard that Texas A&M did have a nursing school on campus. If so, how good is it? I know you can major in biology to become a PA but I would rather major in nursing if I can...If I get a degree in nursing but end up not having the money to go to PA school, at least I can fall back on nursing. What would I do with a biology degree, teach high school? Anyway, Sam Houston claims to have the best pre-physician school in Texas.. I don't know if that's true or not. They suggested that I go the biology rout...Any help would be appreciated. :)
 
Last edited:
Anybody who has a doctoral degree is eligible to be called "doctor." They just have to be careful how they market themselves in terms of what the scope of their practice is. This is just as true for a physician trying to comment on things that aren't a part of their specialty. What is so special about being called "doctor" anyway? Who cares?


Exactly. I am a PA finishing my doctoral (just over a year left THANK GOD), but mine is in policy and research, and I have no plans to use the title in the clinical setting. If I get asked to testify before Congress, or when I give talks, presentations, or lead health policy discussions, sure....but it's not a clinical degree.

Personally, I've never understood why physicians are so uptight about the title to be honest. They don't own it.

If a PA or NP wanted to do it, I would have no problems with it, AS LONG as they clarified that they were either a PA or NP....If they don't clarify their role, or intentionally misrepresent themselves as physicians, well, then that is against the law, and they should be punished accordingly.
 
In the clinical setting, a nurse should call himself/herself a "nurse" regardless of degree. Think about it in terms of the military. You don't see people with Ph.D's in nuclear physics calling themselves "Dr. so and so," instead they use their traditional rank of Colonel, Major, Sargent, etc. I don't see why nurses are so desperate to call themselves "doctor." Inferiority complex much?
 
In the clinical setting, a nurse should call himself/herself a "nurse" regardless of degree. Think about it in terms of the military. You don't see people with Ph.D's in nuclear physics calling themselves "Dr. so and so," instead they use their traditional rank of Colonel, Major, Sargent, etc. I don't see why nurses are so desperate to call themselves "doctor." Inferiority complex much?

its all about the $$$ the closer they can get to people thinking they are same as physicians the more money they can make. Having everybody call them dr is a great way to do this as lay people dont know all the differences in degrees etc.

In the clinical setting only physicians should be called dr.
 
Exactly. I am a PA finishing my doctoral (just over a year left THANK GOD), but mine is in policy and research, and I have no plans to use the title in the clinical setting. If I get asked to testify before Congress, or when I give talks, presentations, or lead health policy discussions, sure....but it's not a clinical degree.

Personally, I've never understood why physicians are so uptight about the title to be honest. They don't own it.

If a PA or NP wanted to do it, I would have no problems with it, AS LONG as they clarified that they were either a PA or NP....If they don't clarify their role, or intentionally misrepresent themselves as physicians, well, then that is against the law, and they should be punished accordingly.

:rolleyes: Because they spend 7 to 11 years in training AFTER their undergrad degree for the right to call themselves a doctor. That is why they are so "uptight" about it.

In terms of knowledge, a doctor is to a nurse what a physician assistant is to a medical assistant. After all, 6 years of training separate a medical assistant from a physician assistant, and ~6 years of training separate a doctor from a nurse practitioner.

But you wouldn't be too happy if someone called you an MA, would you? Or if an MA called themselves a PA?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
:rolleyes: Because they spend 7 to 11 years in training AFTER their undergrad degree for the right to call themselves a doctor. That is why they are so "uptight" about it.

In terms of knowledge, a doctor is to a nurse what a physician assistant is to a medical assistant. After all, 6 years of training separate a medical assistant from a physician assistant, and ~6 years of training separate a doctor from a nurse practitioner.

But you wouldn't be too happy if someone called you an MA, would you? Or if an MA called themselves a PA?


I don't really care what someone calls me, never really have. As far as being a physician, yes, you should be proud of being a physician once you become one.

However, the fallacy in the logic of even attempting to deny others their use, is that the title "Doctor" is not reserved for MD's or DO's alone. And it shouldn't be. DC's, DPM's, OD'S, PhD psychologists, etc.....use the title doctor with patients.

I stand by my comments, and would even add one.....As long as anyone using the title doctor...INCLUDING physicians, clarifies their role, I don't see an issue. Part of it, at least to me, is a status thing that has really been going away gradually anyway...

By that I mean, use of the introduction..."Hi, I'm Dr..........., I'm the physician seeing you" Which, btw, happens a lot anyway. At least at the several institutions I've worked at.
 
I agree that the field is becoming more and more complex with the new addition of so many doctorates. With the fairly new Doctorates in Nursing, Physical Therapy, Audiology, etc., it can become confusing to providers and patients alike as to the medical doctors and the academic doctors. It is the care providers ethical responsibility to make sure their Patients know the difference.

Keep in mind that doctorates have a very long history and some would argue that from a historical perspective there were "academic" doctorates before there were "medical" doctorates.

I am a psychologist and I have a PhD in psychology. I call myself a doctor as I earned a doctorate in psychology. My doctorate is no less rigorous than a medical doctorate as it takes an average 11 years to licensure for psychologists. I have no idea what it takes to get a doctorate in other fields but I assume that they are not easy and they don't come out of a candy machine. I introduce myself as "Hi, I'm Doctor X, and I am psychologist here in the hospital." If they ask what a psychologist is, I often tell them I am a "brain doctor" rather than a "body doctor." Everyone gets that differentiation. It makes it easier as I work on a behavioral health unit for them to understand that I am behavioral health. Whenever I interact with people, I always explain the differences between a psychologist and psychiatrist. It makes it easier on them as they don't expect therapy from the psychiatrist and they don't expect medication from me. Most people know the basic differences in care providers. Most medical doctors I know say "Hi, I'm Dr. X and I am your physician." They seldom refer to themselves only as a "Doctor" but rather as a physician.

In response to an earlier post, I would hope no one is trying to come off as a "Doctor" in any field if they do not have the proper education, training, and licensure.

I also understand the poster's frustration as he/she sees their field being devalued and their training not being appreciated. I hear denigrating comments about physicians quite often. For some reason, maybe a long time ago, physicians had a tendency to come off as a know it all - some still do but that is less and less. As a result, I think people really do expect physicians to know it all and when they don't...because they are human...the Patients think they are less than.

Just my two cents...


+1....

A large part of this is derived from status. Or the percieved threat to the existing, or previous iteration of the status of a physician.

It's interesting to me, as a friend of mine, who is a PhD Sociologist who specializes in studying status within various societies, including the impact of status on societal functions, is interested in writing a paper (exploratory, meta-analyses) with me about physician status, or rather physician perception of status, and how it impacts healthcare, and in particular, how it impacts the health workforce, and the use of other providers. So this is quite apropos.

Recently a good friend of mine, who works in a separate field, stated that, and I quote: "It doesn't matter, a doctor to me is no different from my car mechanic. I don't really care about their education, I mean I know that they went to a lot of school, but so what? All I know is that when I'm not feeling well, I go in, and they fix it. They're not really any different than my car guy or an appliance repairman."

It was a little shocking to hear, but this seems to be a more and more common theme/attitude.
 
:thumbup:


pprsb1220a.jpg


New Pennsylvania law requires physicians to wear photo IDs
States are working to guarantee that patients know whom they are seeing and are not deceived by health professionals who misrepresent their training.

By Carolyne Krupa, amednews staff. Posted Dec. 20, 2010.

A new Pennsylvania law aims to make it clear for patients who is taking their blood pressure, giving them an injection or preparing to operate on a loved one.

Under the law signed Nov. 23 by Gov. Edward Rendell, physicians, nurses and other health care professionals soon will be required to wear photo identification badges that state their credentials in large block letters, with descriptions such as "physician" or "registered nurse."

"The idea is that you can read this instantly at a conversational distance," said John J. Laskas Jr., MD, a dermatologist in Glen Mills, Pa., and chair of the Pennsylvania Academy of Dermatology and Dermatologic Surgery's patient safety and scope of practice committee. "Then the patient knows and can make a judgment whether or not this is the level of expertise they need. We need to know and have a right to know the credentials of the person who is giving us care."

Beginning in January 2011, the state health department will have 90 days to develop interim regulations and then 18 months to finalize them. All Pennsylvania health care employers will need to comply by June 2015.

The Pennsylvania law is one example of how states are working to ensure that patients know whom they are seeing and are not misled by health professionals who misrepresent their level of training. At least two states -- California and Arizona -- have enacted laws requiring that any advertisements for medical services include the health professional's title and license type.

Illinois adopted its Truth in Health Care Professional Services Act in July, requiring health professionals to post their license when seeing patients in their office. They also must wear a visible badge stating their license credentials during all patient encounters.
Disclosing who the doctor is

The American Medical Association's Truth in Advertising campaign is designed to increase clarity and transparency in health care. The initiative encourages all states to enact laws mandating that all health care professionals disclose their training and qualifications.

Model legislation drafted by the AMA would require practitioners to identify their license type in advertisements, wear a clearly visible photo ID badge when seeing patients and post their type of license in their offices. The AMA further recommends that the rules apply in any practice setting, and that physicians who have collaborative agreements with nonphysicians post in each office a schedule of regular hours when they will be there.
At least 2 states require that medical ads include a health professional's title and license type.

"Research shows that patients can easily mistake the qualifications of health care professionals and often believe they are seeing a medical doctor when they are not," said Rebecca J. Patchin, MD, immediate past chair of the AMA Board of Trustees.

Ninety-six percent of U.S. adults believe that health care professionals should display both their level of training and their legal licensure, according to an AMA survey done in 2008 of 852 adults nationwide.

Pennsylvania's legislation is an issue of full disclosure and patient safety, said Bruce Brod, MD, clinical associate professor of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

"When you're a patient, you're in a very vulnerable position," said Dr. Brod, chair of the Pennsylvania Academy of Dermatology and Dermatologic Surgery's political advocacy committee. "A lot of patients feel timid about asking the person [for] their credentials. They are concerned the person will take it as an insult or that it will affect the care they receive."

Lead bill sponsor Pennsylvania State Rep. Jennifer Mann was inspired to pursue the measure after visiting with a senior citizen constituent. The woman complained that while her cable man wore a photo ID when he came to her house, the people hired to provide her home health care had no such identification.

The woman was concerned about letting strangers into her home to provide sometimes-intimate health services when she did not know if they were who they claimed to be, said Mann's chief of staff, Rich Pronesti.

Dr. Laskas said he pushed for the legislation after seeing a resident and medical student from an area children's hospital with badges displaying their titles in big, bold letters.

"The problem is that since physicians don't necessarily wear their white coats and nurses don't necessarily wear their caps anymore, the patients can't really tell who is taking care of them," he said.

Though many hospitals in the state require name tags, they are often hard to read, with small lettering and abbreviations for degrees that some patients can't decipher, said Scot Chadwick, vice president for governmental affairs for the Pennsylvania Medical Society. "The genesis of it has been the increase in doctorates being offered and obtained by nonphysician health care providers who use the term 'doctor' in referring to themselves," he said. "That has led to a growing concern about possible patient confusion."

Dr. Brod has received inquiries from physicians across the country who are interested in supporting similar legislation. "We're hoping that this serves as a bellwether for other states," he said.​
 
my hospital on the west coast has had these for about a yr.
we have color coded PHYSICIAN, NURSE, PA, NP, TECH, MA, XRAY tags that hang below our regular hospital ID's.
 
It would certainly make things easier as a medical student when you have to track down people on the floor... Sometimes I think the women around there wonder if I am staring at their breasts when I am really just trying to see if they are a case manager, haha. Seriously though, the titles at our hospital are in such small print that you have to be three feet away in order to read it. At that distance, they think you are approaching them and want something, but it's just as you get close enough to read that they are the dietitian. An awkward dance ensues and then you're off to continue your quest to find the wandering case manager...
 
Below is my take about this subject... Well said!
The “DNP” is a fake doctorate. You can say that you are “doctorally prepared” (that ridiculous phrase comes up again and again, not only in nursing circles but also in physical therapy), but it does not mean you have a real doctorate. Look at the DNP curriculum: it is all a bunch of touchy-feely public-health fluff. How can you have “independent prescriptive authority” when you never even took organic chemistry, let alone biochemistry? You are putting drugs in patients’ bodies without understanding even what those drugs are on a molecular level? And now you are pushing for independence and autonomy? It is clear that these NPs desire the independence, authority and prestige of the medical practicioner, without having to take the MCAT, the USMLE steps 1-3, or a board certification exam, and without having to make it through 36-hr shifts during a residency (let alone gross anatomy!!), etc. This is not about “the patients”…it is about greed, ego, and ultimately a kind of gleeful ignorance. Is the DNP equal to MD? Do they really deserve independent practice rights? How about if you ask an RN who ultimately got her MD? What do you think someone like that would have to say about it? By the way, I am not an MD. I have a REAL doctorate, a PhD, and it ain’t a PhD in nursing. I basically had to write a book (called a doctoral dissertation), an original contribution to science, to get my (real) doctorate. What did you DNPs have to do to get your phony, weak pseudo-doctorate? Take a few ON-LINE classes in public health like “advanced nursing leadership”? Sounds a lot like those fake EdD degrees that schoolteachers get when they want to be promoted to school principal. The world is swimming with fake doctorates, but everyone sees through them. - See more at: http://healthin30.com/2010/05/shoul...ctice-be-called-doctors/#sthash.lJfMaFB9.dpuf
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
While I don't think nurses should call themselves doctors, it's truly, utterly pathetic how so many doctors clearly feel threatened by their doing so. If they are that envious and status-obsessed, they don't deserve to call themselves doctors either, and I sure as hell don't want follow their medical advice.
 
What's interesting about this discussion is that I have literally never heard a nurse refer to themselves as a doctor. Not once, not even the PhD prepared nurses. My professors in nursing school would just introduce themselves by their first name because they didn't want the patients to assume they were a medical doctor.

What I have heard is CNAs and MAs referring to themselves as nurses. Even, LPNs referring to themselves as RNs. I'm not egotistical but it does bother me when someone imitates my profession and my education. After all, they didn't go to school for 4 years and they're not licensed to do everything that I can do. In my opinion, it's dangerous for any healthcare professional to misrepresent themselves.
 
While I don't think nurses should call themselves doctors, it's truly, utterly pathetic how so many doctors clearly feel threatened by their doing so. If they are that envious and status-obsessed, they don't deserve to call themselves doctors either, and I sure as hell don't want follow their medical advice.

Get there and THEN see how "PATHETIC" it is. However, physicians have done this to themselves. Specialists hire mid levels to enrich their bottom line. Groups hire the same for cheaper labor. The term "provider" is a stealth approach to equate physicians with NP's. The public perception is they are "the same". This will affect salaries and also enable the nursing unions (in back pocket of the democrats) to continue ramp up their ROI. Physicians could easily deal with this by simply not helping them out. This is nothing different than IT workers in the US being told to train their replacements from India, simply because they are cheaper.

Let them take the entire liability and simply walk away from any collaboration. You BT they would have done the same if they were to take 1 dime in pay cut. Physicians have been having pay cut for decades now and there is no end in sight. Politicians in general should have to see an NP themselves. After all, "it's the same"...
 
Top