E! True Hollywood Story - Dr. Chudner

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ben Chudner

Senior Member
Moderator Emeritus
Lifetime Donor
15+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
923
Reaction score
3
Points
4,551
Location
Rochester, NY
  1. Optometrist
I have read so much negativity in the posts recently, especially from some that claim to be in private practice. Just remember, when they use a screen name that allows them to be anonymous, there is no way to know if they are really doctors. Let's assume they are, and they are either not happy with being an OD or just feel there are better professions out there. That's fine and that's their opinion. I am not going to tell them they are wrong, nor am I going to tell prospective students to think positively and the perfect practice opportunity will appear. What I would like to do is give you my story. This is how I went from a brand new OD without a job, to the 100% owner of a million dollar practice in the span of 4 years.

I graduated in 1997 from UC Berkeley. I was a pretty good student (3.6 gpa) and managed to get accepted into the ocular disease residency at Bascom Palmer Eye Institute in Miami. Living in Miami on $22,500 a year is very difficult. In fact, it was so difficult that my wife and I had to share our condo with one of the other residents. I can't complain too much, as we were walking distance from a private beach that we had access to through our condo association. To really make ends meet, however, I had to work some weekends at a Pearle Vision Express. The $800 Saturdays allowed my wife and I to actually enjoy Miami and pay down some debt that we incurred during optometry school. That experience taught me a lot about corporate optometry. First of all, it made me realize that I had no interest in that type of practice. Secondly, I learned that there are patients out there that just want a pair of glasses and/or contacts, and no amount of education will make them want a comprehensive eye exam with photos, corneal topography, screening visual fields, etc from a private practice doctor even if they have the most professional looking office in the world.

After residency, I looked for, and found a job at an ophthalmology clinic because that's what I thought I was supposed to do with my extra education. My starting salary was $65K per year with a bonus plan that would guarantee me an extra $5K with the possibility of up to $15K based on production. Unfortunately, my bonus was based on optical sales which is illegal in Washington State, and so after consulting with my lawyer I agreed to a flat salary of $70K that first year. That was 1998. My first raise came 12 months later and it put me up to $83K. 12 months after that I was up to $90K. By the middle of my third year, I became a little disillusioned working for an MD and when partnership was not going to be financially feasible, I decided to look elsewhere (3 MD's have since left that practice for the same reason).

In November of 2000, I was made aware of an opportunity in my area by accident. I happened to be the local society president and was asked a question about a situation within the largest OD office in our county. Basically, the partners could not agree on a final buy-out price, so the majority owner excercised his option to buy back all of the minority partner's shares and fired him. Within 2 months of hearing about this, I had negotiated out of my non-compete and was hammering out the details of buying out that majority (now sole) owner.

The deal closed on August 1st, 2001. The previous owner stayed on as a full time employee for 3 years. Back then, full time was 3 days a week. We are open 6 days a week, and each of us worked 3 days. During his last year, I worked 4 days a week and he worked 2. After he retired, I hired a part time doctor to work Fridays and Saturdays so that I could continue to work only 4 days a week. Since she started, I have opened up a dry eye clinic on Fridays which runs only a half day and I use the other half for admin time. I am now in the process of negotiating the purchase of the other practice my associate works at part time and once that is complete, she will begin the buy in process.

My income has never decreased through all of this. The price I paid for the practice was between $500K and $1MM (I would prefer not to be specific). I had no problem qualifying for an SBA loan because the owner carried 20% of the note and was willing to continue working at the office. Even after taking on all that debt, my salary more than doubled on day 1 of owning the practice, and has increased ever since. Now to be fair, I don't see all of that money as I have to pay off my business loan (only 4 more years!), but I consider that money an investment. When my associate begins her buy in, because my practice is worth more now than it was 6 years ago, I am already going to see some gains from that investment. When I retire, I will see the rest, and if we continue to grow at the rate we have, it will be a substantial amount of money. I am just about to start the process of building a new office which will be another investment, and as part of the land deal I will own the building I am currently in which will be leased out. Yet another investment.

I am not telling you this to brag. I just want to point out that optometry has been very good to me. I enjoy what I do, and I make very good money. I used to say I got very lucky in finding my practice. I realize now that I worked hard to get to a point where I was ready when the opportunity presented itself. One final note, I do not hate corporate optometry. I know why OD's choose that road, and I don't fault them for that. I also know that no amount of complaining about Wal-Mart will make it go away. I choose to focus my energy on making my practice the best it can be by providing quality care that patients see value in. I do hope this post shows you that the financial benefits of private practice may take years to realize, but they are far greater than corporate when you factor in the ability to sell your practice, as well as owning your building. You can go for the quick buck available in corporate, but in the long run you will do much better in private practice.
 
How, in the name of Christ can you call that an E! True Hollywood Story?

There isn't a single mention of an affair, a stint in rehab, abusive families, divorce, a video of you having sex on the internet, sexual harrassment, or a trashed hotel room. How lame! 👎

On a more serious note....I'm glad that Dr. Chudner posted his story. He has been at the whole private practice owner thing longer than I have. I've only been at it for half a year now. But I will say that my situation was eerily similar to his with respect to how I found the office I wanted, and like him, my salary pretty much tripled the day I started. In fact, I will say that I made more money in the first three months as an owner than I ever did in any full year of working for someone else. Of course, most of that extra money is going to pay off the massive note I have but c'est la vie.

Throughout my tenure on studentdoctor.net I have been one of the more negative voices, in particular when I first joined. Since then, I have tried to tone the negativity down because I realized that most of the students and prospective students on here didn't have the right frame of reference to understand what I was ranting about. And though I stand by every single thing I have ever said on here, I've tried to post my concerns in a way that students can understand what lays ahead of them.

And for the billionth time....the key to success is accepting and billing medical insurances. I know that Dr. Chudner would agree that his practice would not be even close to what it is without the ability to bill medical insurances, and I can honestly say the same about mine.

A great and inspiring story, Ben. Good job, and thanks for taking the time to share it.!👍
 
And for the billionth time....the key to success is accepting and billing medical insurances. I know that Dr. Chudner would agree that his practice would not be even close to what it is without the ability to bill medical insurances, and I can honestly say the same about mine.
There is no doubt that my practice would be just another eyeglass shop with a doctor if I couldn't get onto medical plans. My state has an "any willing provider" law, so OD's cannot be discriminated against. I did have the advantage that I worked for a practice before going out on my own. The MD practice made sure I was on every medical panel, and so when I left it was just a matter of switching my information to the new clinic. During the time I had to wait for the paperwork to go through, we billed everything under the other doctor. It was a pain because he had to "oversee" me, which meant he had to review and sign every chart, but it didn't last too long and it allowed me to jump in with both feet right away.
 
Thanks Dr.Chudner for the information, I'm a newbie to pre-optometry. I'm almost 23.5, just finished a masters and have very recently decided I want to become an optometrist. To be honest I barely knew anything about optometry until I met someone that just graduated from optometry school who encouraged me to look into it. I was like "optometry, huh?"

As soon as I started doing some research to understand what it is and what exactly optometrists do I just got so comfortable with the idea and eventually got to a point where I was convinced it's the absolute best career path for me. I've never felt so sure about a future career path and I've definately been through my share of phases-it's the biggest relief in the world that I know what I want to do. I'm just starting out the application process.

so that's my intro to you ANYWAY....... I'm really interested to know more about the medical plan talk stuff. Do you think most other states have something similar to washington's "any willing provider" law or do you your state is unique in that? One of the optometrists that I shadow has a private practice and I would say 90% of the patients he sees are on medicaid. I always wondered why that was and where all the non-medicaid people choose to go. I asked the manager (his wife) before if it would be more lucrative if they saw patients with private insurance and her response was "no, not really". she says it's too much of a pain and hassle and to be on the provider list for insurances so to me that seems like that would really put a limit on how an optometrist in private practice can expand and succeed if you can only see medicaid patients or patients who could just pay; I kind of just accpeted that 'reality' as one of the negatives or limits, if you will, of being an optometrist that I would have to accept but then I read your posting and you talked significanly about insurance and providers and I was like "ok, I'm totally confused". Do you think this is something that's going to be so different from state to state or do you think alot of your success was due to thefact that you worked with MDs early on and got yourself on provider lists and had you done that anywhere else you would also have been similarly successful?
 
Do you think most other states have something similar to washington's "any willing provider" law or do you your state is unique in that?
I really don't know about other states other than Washington is not the only one with that law. You should be able to contact the state board and find out if the state you are interested in has a similar law.
One of the optometrists that I shadow has a private practice and I would say 90% of the patients he sees are on medicaid. I always wondered why that was and where all the non-medicaid people choose to go. I asked the manager (his wife) before if it would be more lucrative if they saw patients with private insurance and her response was "no, not really". she says it's too much of a pain and hassle and to be on the provider list for insurances so to me that seems like that would really put a limit on how an optometrist in private practice can expand and succeed if you can only see medicaid patients or patients who could just pay
A Medicaid practice is definitely one way to go, and depending on the reimbursement can be profitable. In Washington, for example, our state plan called DSHS pays more for an exam than VSP. And with DSHS, I can treat medical problems such as glaucoma whereas VSP only covers routine exams. I am not sure why the doctor's wife feels it is a hassle to get on provider lists, but maybe in that state it is. For me, my insurance specialist fills out the paperwork and all I have to do is sign it. Not much of a hassle if you ask me.
Do you think this is something that's going to be so different from state to state or do you think alot of your success was due to thefact that you worked with MDs early on and got yourself on provider lists and had you done that anywhere else you would also have been similarly successful?
It is something that is different from state to state and that is why KHE is so correct when he says you need to do some research. As for my success, I honestly believe I would have been successful no matter where I ended up. Working for 3 years as an employee was an advantage, but not because I got onto provider lists. It gave me the opportunity to learn how to run a large ($2MM) practice without having to take any risks. My practice now runs just like that OMD practice. My fees are just as high, my exams are the same, my staff is trained the same way, etc. I am not an advocate for opening up cold right away only because I think it's important to get some risk free experience before going out on your own. That being said, I have nothing but respect for those OD's that do open up cold right out of school and become successful. That's something that I am not sure I could do.
 
I'm sure it must be the state you're in that makes it easy for you to be a provider or the state that I'm in makes it difficult because if it was that easy they'd be doing it (becoming providers that is). He did mention that when he first started practicing there was alot that he couldn't do as an optometrist that he could do now in louisiana (like prescribing certain things). Thus the laws have changed favorably and hopefully by the time I graduate things will be even easier.

This practice that I'm shadowing/volunteering for does a bit of charity work, which is great, but I don't understand why they and other optometrists in private practice don't make the time to put more energy into shaping public policy.

Anyway, thanks for the info, VERY VALUABLE!
 
Excellent and informative thread 👍
 
I have read so much negativity in the posts recently, especially from some that claim to be in private practice. Just remember, when they use a screen name that allows them to be anonymous, there is no way to know if they are really doctors. Let's assume they are, and they are either not happy with being an OD or just feel there are better professions out there. That's fine and that's their opinion. I am not going to tell them they are wrong, nor am I going to tell prospective students to think positively and the perfect practice opportunity will appear. What I would like to do is give you my story. This is how I went from a brand new OD without a job, to the 100% owner of a million dollar practice in the span of 4 years.

I graduated in 1997 from UC Berkeley. I was a pretty good student (3.6 gpa) and managed to get accepted into the ocular disease residency at Bascom Palmer Eye Institute in Miami. Living in Miami on $22,500 a year is very difficult. In fact, it was so difficult that my wife and I had to share our condo with one of the other residents. I can't complain too much, as we were walking distance from a private beach that we had access to through our condo association. To really make ends meet, however, I had to work some weekends at a Pearle Vision Express. The $800 Saturdays allowed my wife and I to actually enjoy Miami and pay down some debt that we incurred during optometry school. That experience taught me a lot about corporate optometry. First of all, it made me realize that I had no interest in that type of practice. Secondly, I learned that there are patients out there that just want a pair of glasses and/or contacts, and no amount of education will make them want a comprehensive eye exam with photos, corneal topography, screening visual fields, etc from a private practice doctor even if they have the most professional looking office in the world.

After residency, I looked for, and found a job at an ophthalmology clinic because that's what I thought I was supposed to do with my extra education. My starting salary was $65K per year with a bonus plan that would guarantee me an extra $5K with the possibility of up to $15K based on production. Unfortunately, my bonus was based on optical sales which is illegal in Washington State, and so after consulting with my lawyer I agreed to a flat salary of $70K that first year. That was 1998. My first raise came 12 months later and it put me up to $83K. 12 months after that I was up to $90K. By the middle of my third year, I became a little disillusioned working for an MD and when partnership was not going to be financially feasible, I decided to look elsewhere (3 MD's have since left that practice for the same reason).

In November of 2000, I was made aware of an opportunity in my area by accident. I happened to be the local society president and was asked a question about a situation within the largest OD office in our county. Basically, the partners could not agree on a final buy-out price, so the majority owner excercised his option to buy back all of the minority partner's shares and fired him. Within 2 months of hearing about this, I had negotiated out of my non-compete and was hammering out the details of buying out that majority (now sole) owner.

The deal closed on August 1st, 2001. The previous owner stayed on as a full time employee for 3 years. Back then, full time was 3 days a week. We are open 6 days a week, and each of us worked 3 days. During his last year, I worked 4 days a week and he worked 2. After he retired, I hired a part time doctor to work Fridays and Saturdays so that I could continue to work only 4 days a week. Since she started, I have opened up a dry eye clinic on Fridays which runs only a half day and I use the other half for admin time. I am now in the process of negotiating the purchase of the other practice my associate works at part time and once that is complete, she will begin the buy in process.

My income has never decreased through all of this. The price I paid for the practice was between $500K and $1MM (I would prefer not to be specific). I had no problem qualifying for an SBA loan because the owner carried 20% of the note and was willing to continue working at the office. Even after taking on all that debt, my salary more than doubled on day 1 of owning the practice, and has increased ever since. Now to be fair, I don't see all of that money as I have to pay off my business loan (only 4 more years!), but I consider that money an investment. When my associate begins her buy in, because my practice is worth more now than it was 6 years ago, I am already going to see some gains from that investment. When I retire, I will see the rest, and if we continue to grow at the rate we have, it will be a substantial amount of money. I am just about to start the process of building a new office which will be another investment, and as part of the land deal I will own the building I am currently in which will be leased out. Yet another investment.

I am not telling you this to brag. I just want to point out that optometry has been very good to me. I enjoy what I do, and I make very good money. I used to say I got very lucky in finding my practice. I realize now that I worked hard to get to a point where I was ready when the opportunity presented itself. One final note, I do not hate corporate optometry. I know why OD's choose that road, and I don't fault them for that. I also know that no amount of complaining about Wal-Mart will make it go away. I choose to focus my energy on making my practice the best it can be by providing quality care that patients see value in. I do hope this post shows you that the financial benefits of private practice may take years to realize, but they are far greater than corporate when you factor in the ability to sell your practice, as well as owning your building. You can go for the quick buck available in corporate, but in the long run you will do much better in private practice.

My, you seem to be your biggest admirer, Dr. Chudner. It's great that you're trying to show students interested in optometry, or recent grads, that optometry is a viable and potentially successful career path; however, your post seems a tad narcissistic and grandiose.

I honestly don't mean to flame here, or appear disrespectful, and perhaps I'm missing your humour and making too much out of some of your comments, but the title of your post is...misleading and self-aggrandizing. Also, how many people out there in the health care professions refer to themselves by Dr.?

Yeah, so you made it and did well for yourself. Yeah, we get that. Others have pointed out why optometry is frought with problems and might not be the best career path for some. Being an informed consumer is a good thing.

I was trained as a psychiatrist. I see MANY problems with psychiatry and freely point them out to others, but I also discuss the things that are good about the profession and even discuss my personal hx as it relates to my training. Your background and success story are great tools to show the pros of optometry, but the way you presented it...well, it was frought with what appeared to be self-puffery and laden with ego defenses that make me wonder what your true motivation here was.

It's nice to see professionals who fervently support their chosen professions, but I think many of you on the OD forum seem to view your profession as one that is fighting for its rights, struggling to advance, and under attack by organized medicine. I don't think this is the case. I think that if anything, optometry has grown leaps nad bounds as a profession and will continue to prosper under the health care reforms that taking place in the US.

PAs, psychologists, NPs, pods, clinical pharmacists, PTs, audiologists, and many other professionals have advanced their educational requirements, professional standards, and scopes of practice/authority significantly over the last few decades. There is no doubt there is room for improvement, but your profession is going to continue to grow.

Just like any other professional out there, an individual optometrist's success is often based on his/her own set of values, abilities, and skills coupled with market factors. What worked for Dr. Chudner might not work for Dr. KHE or Dr. Ryan Eyeball; there are multiple factors that contribue to one's success.

So, while I think your unabridged bio had good intentions, it might behoove you to consider toning down your inflated ego.
 
I honestly don't mean to flame here, or appear disrespectful, and perhaps I'm missing your humour and making too much out of some of your comments, but the title of your post is...misleading and self-aggrandizing.

Your background and success story are great tools to show the pros of optometry, but the way you presented it...well, it was frought with what appeared to be self-puffery and laden with ego defenses that make me wonder what your true motivation here was.

Just for the record, I didn't think the post was self-aggrandizing at all. I thought it was a very straightforward story of Dr. Chudner's experience thus far in his career. I thought it was kind of nice to read something positive around here for a change.
 
My, you seem to be your biggest admirer, Dr. Chudner.
Zack, you can call me Ben.
I was trained as a psychiatrist.
Thank god you keep reminding us of your training, because otherwise we might forget. If I were your psychiatrist, I would suggest that you feel a sense of inadequacy and must therefore continue to make people aware of just how much education you have.
Your background and success story are great tools to show the pros of optometry, but the way you presented it...well, it was frought with what appeared to be self-puffery and laden with ego defenses that make me wonder what your true motivation here was.
Is this a professional opinion? If so, do I owe you for your time?
It's nice to see professionals who fervently support their chosen professions, but I think many of you on the OD forum seem to view your profession as one that is fighting for its rights, struggling to advance, and under attack by organized medicine. I don't think this is the case. I think that if anything, optometry has grown leaps nad bounds as a profession and will continue to prosper under the health care reforms that taking place in the US.
Please do not pretend to know anything about what OD's think, and while I appreciate your kind words about our profession, you need to understand that we do not seek your approval or support.
Just like any other professional out there, an individual optometrist's success is often based on his/her own set of values, abilities, and skills coupled with market factors. What worked for Dr. Chudner might not work for Dr. KHE or Dr. Ryan Eyeball; there are multiple factors that contribue to one's success.
Very true, and since only a small number of doctors were discussing success stories, my hope was that my story would encourage other doctors to share theirs.
So, while I think your unabridged bio had good intentions, it might behoove you to consider toning down your inflated ego.
Those who live in glass houses, should not throw stones, Zack. I've watched your transformation on the optometry thread. In the beginning you were an annoying troll that was very anti-optometry. Then you began to listen to some of us, and you actually changed your mind regarding our profession. When that occurred, your posts became constructive and informative. Unfortuately, with your inability to understand my post, you have once again reverted back to a troll. I only hope this is temporary.

I also hope that you see this reply as another example of my humor (or humour as you put it). You can be sure that your opinion of my post means very little to me as you are not the target audience. Based on the number of positive responses both in this thread and in my PM box, I am sure that the current and prospective OD students got the point.
 
Zack, you can call me Ben.Thank god you keep reminding us of your training, because otherwise we might forget. If I were your psychiatrist, I would suggest that you feel a sense of inadequacy and must therefore continue to make people aware of just how much education you have.Is this a professional opinion? If so, do I owe you for your time?Please do not pretend to know anything about what OD's think, and while I appreciate your kind words about our profession, you need to understand that we do not seek your approval or support.Very true, and since only a small number of doctors were discussing success stories, my hope was that my story would encourage other doctors to share theirs.Those who live in glass houses, should not throw stones, Zack. I've watched your transformation on the optometry thread. In the beginning you were an annoying troll that was very anti-optometry. Then you began to listen to some of us, and you actually changed your mind regarding our profession. When that occurred, your posts became constructive and informative. Unfortuately, with your inability to understand my post, you have once again reverted back to a troll. I only hope this is temporary.

I also hope that you see this reply as another example of my humor (or humour as you put it). You can be sure that your opinion of my post means very little to me as you are not the target audience. Based on the number of positive responses both in this thread and in my PM box, I am sure that the current and prospective OD students got the point.

Alrighty then. Sorry, Ben, I guess I misinterpreted your intentions. I'm neither a braggard, nor a troll. I felt your story was a good teaching tool to illustrate the positive aspects of the profession and it clearly demonstrated that if one is motivated, one can succeed in private practice.

I mean, that is the crux of the nay-sayers of optometry, right? That the OD market is oversaturated with grads and the competition is fierce and due to financial constraints and pressures incurred by hefty student loans, many ODs end up working retail and this somehow diminishes all that you've worked hard to achieve and minimalizes the clinical competence of optometrists. Maybe I'm oversimplifying the arguments posited by those who bemoan the negative aspects of optometry, but that's the gist of what I got from their arguments.

You, on the other hand, were showing, based on your subjective experiences, that one can make it in private practice without selling out to the corporate world.

My ONLY problem with your post, personally, Ben, was how you phrased the title: the E! Hollywood thingy and the Dr. Chudner part. Why? I don't know, I guess I read it and thought it was somewhat pretentious. I'm sorry. I know in reality you were trying to be funny. BTW, I use the British spelling of humour -- sorry. It's an old habit.

I guess, to be honest, your post rubbed me the wrong way and I should have just read it for it was: something constructive. I apologize. My bad.

My bill is in the mail, however. 🙂
 
My ONLY problem with your post, personally, Ben, was how you phrased the title: the E! Hollywood thingy and the Dr. Chudner part. Why? I don't know, I guess I read it and thought it was somewhat pretentious.
To be honest, when I first wrote it, the title was E! True Hollywood Story - Ben Chudner, but I changed it. The reason I changed it was because if you Google Ben Chudner, some of my SDN posts come up. My concern was that patients sometimes Google my name to find my phone number and if this post came up I wasn't sure how it would be received by someone seeking my services. In fact if you Google my name today, this thread is the 3rd listing so I should have just left it, but I also did not think that by putting Dr. Chudner it would change the meaning of the post.
My bill is in the mail, however. 🙂
So is my check.😉
 
My, you seem to be your biggest admirer, Dr. Chudner. It's great that you're trying to show students interested in optometry, or recent grads, that optometry is a viable and potentially successful career path; however, your post seems a tad narcissistic and grandiose.

SNIP


I was trained as a psychiatrist. I see MANY problems with psychiatry and freely point them out to others, but I also discuss the things that are good about the profession and even discuss my personal hx as it relates to my training. Your background and success story are great tools to show the pros of optometry, but the way you presented it...well, it was frought with what appeared to be self-puffery and laden with ego defenses that make me wonder what your true motivation here was.

SNIP


So, while I think your unabridged bio had good intentions, it might behoove you to consider toning down your inflated ego.


Well shucks, ah ain't no fancy-trained head-shrinker, but don't y'all call this "projection"!?
 
To be honest, when I first wrote it, the title was E! True Hollywood Story - Ben Chudner, but I changed it. The reason I changed it was because if you Google Ben Chudner, some of my SDN posts come up. My concern was that patients sometimes Google my name to find my phone number and if this post came up I wasn't sure how it would be received by someone seeking my services. Looking at it now, I think this post will still come up so it makes no difference, but at the time I didn't see how putting Dr. Chudner would change the message of the post.So is my check.😉


I think we're close to the same age. I'm 36, almost 37. About 3 years ago, I started going by my first name in my practice. I felt it was too arrogant nad pompous to insist on being called Dr. I outgrew that pretense. I notice that most MDs don't refer to each other as "doctor" and most are comfortable introducing themselves by their first and last names without the honorific Dr. Not always, but I noticed this is true in MI. Same with many dentists...more laid back. However, some professions strictly adhere to the title and I guess that's the part of your post that "rubbed my rhubarb". Sorry, it was just me, it wasn't you.

I guess I need to start drinking coffee again.

BTW, I only bring up my specialty so that people clearly know I'm not an OMD, surgeon, or anything like that. I'm a lowly psychiatrist. I admit that. In other words, my opinion on the OD forum + a dime will buy you a piping hot cup of JACK SQUAT. If anything, however, I'm learning a lot about ODs and what they can do.

I just think, IMO, that you guys might want to lighten up with the "doctor" stuff and be proud to call yourself optometrists. I noticed how many of your posts and KHE's posts refer to optometrists as doctors. I guess this is common in optometry, but you seldom see it in non-physicians. I mean, dentists don't go around saying "not many doctors in our office did this" or "young doctors in pratice". Usually, they just "young dentists" or "we have three dentists in our office" or whatever.

Yeah, I know...nit-picky, but what's wrong with saying optometrist instead of doctor?
 
Well shucks, ah ain't no fancy-trained head-shrinker, but don't y'all call this "projection"!?

I believe I admitted it was ME, not him. So, yeah...it is. I am only human, after all.
 
I just think, IMO, that you guys might want to lighten up with the "doctor" stuff and be proud to call yourself optometrists. I noticed how many of your posts and KHE's posts refer to optometrists as doctors. I guess this is common in optometry, but you seldom see it in non-physicians. I mean, dentists don't go around saying "not many doctors in our office did this" or "young doctors in pratice". Usually, they just "young dentists" or "we have three dentists in our office" or whatever.

That's strange because I have no ego about whether someone calls me doctor or not. In fact, I don't use the title when I'm seeing patients. I always introduce myself with my first and last name without title. The only time I use it is if I'm phoning another provider.

I'm glad that Ben posted his success story. It is true that there is an awful amount of negativity that flies around on here and I've contributed my share of that. Ben's story not only shows that you can be successful, but that you can be wildly successful. That's encouraging and we need more stories like that.

The concern that I have always had is that I want to make sure that students understand that "hard work" and "optimism" isn't enough. The people on here who are down on the profession and are negative do not necissarily have some sort of deficient personality or clinical skills. Lack of "success" in optometry can often times be the results of circumstances far beyond your control. That's incredibly frustrating.

So, hats off to Ben for sharing his story and providing a glimpse into a successful practice.
 
I think we're close to the same age. I'm 36, almost 37. About 3 years ago, I started going by my first name in my practice. I felt it was too arrogant nad pompous to insist on being called Dr. I outgrew that pretense. I notice that most MDs don't refer to each other as "doctor" and most are comfortable introducing themselves by their first and last names without the honorific Dr. Not always, but I noticed this is true in MI. Same with many dentists...more laid back. However, some professions strictly adhere to the title and I guess that's the part of your post that "rubbed my rhubarb". Sorry, it was just me, it wasn't you.
We must be very close in age because I will be 37 in a couple of months. In my practice, I do not use doctor when introducing myself to patients. I started that right after residency for the most part because my last name seems hard for people to pronounce. It's always been easier to say "just call me Ben". I do require my staff to call me Dr. Chudner, but only in front of patients. Even when there are no patients around, they still feel more comfortable calling me Dr. Chudner but they are not required to. I also lecture quite a bit for a contact lens company and I find it amusing when other lecturers want the reps to call them Dr. I prefer to be called Ben, because at the end of the day, I know I am not any better than they are.
BTW, I only bring up my specialty so that people clearly know I'm not an OMD, surgeon, or anything like that. I'm a lowly psychiatrist. I admit that. In other words, my opinion on the OD forum + a dime will buy you a piping hot cup of JACK SQUAT. If anything, however, I'm learning a lot about ODs and what they can do.
Yeah, I was just looking for something to give you a hard time about. :laugh:
I just think, IMO, that you guys might want to lighten up with the "doctor" stuff and be proud to call yourself optometrists. I noticed how many of your posts and KHE's posts refer to optometrists as doctors. I guess this is common in optometry, but you seldom see it in non-physicians. I mean, dentists don't go around saying "not many doctors in our office did this" or "young doctors in pratice". Usually, they just "young dentists" or "we have three dentists in our office" or whatever.
I don't know the answer to this. If you ask me about my office I would say I have one associate working for me rather than one doctor. I think you might need to lighten up with the be proud to be optometrists. I think the majority of us are proud, but since the general public has no idea what an optometrist is, I have found it easier to say I am an eye doctor when asked what I do.
Yeah, I know...nit-picky, but what's wrong with saying optometrist instead of doctor?
I think the real question is why does it matter if a person with a doctorate calls himself doctor? Do you really believe that by OD's and DC's calling themselves doctor it lessens the value of being a doctor? And if so, do you really measure your worth based on the public's perception of what a doctor is? Please don't tell me it's because you are concerned about patient's being deceived, because all that should matter is that they receive quality care. My favorite MD point is the study that showed patients would prefer to see an ophthalmologist for their eyecare if given a choice once they knew the education difference. You can tell MD's don't need a study to be scientific if it proves their point. I could perform the same type of study and go through the extensive training OD's go through with regards to spectacle correction and contact lens fitting, compare that to seeing the tech in an MD office and "prove" that patients would prefer to see OD's for all primary eyecare.
 
Whoever earns their doctorate degree after years of hard work deserves the right to be called a doctor, be it OD, PH.D., PharmD, etc.. Prozack, if you don't want your patients to address you by doctor, then it's your personal preference. Don't try to propagate your opinion onto others. The world doesn't revolve around you. Thanks.
 
We must be very close in age because I will be 37 in a couple of months. In my practice, I do not use doctor when introducing myself to patients. I started that right after residency for the most part because my last name seems hard for people to pronounce. It's always been easier to say "just call me Ben". I do require my staff to call me Dr. Chudner, but only in front of patients. Even when there are no patients around, they still feel more comfortable calling me Dr. Chudner but they are not required to. I also lecture quite a bit for a contact lens company and I find it amusing when other lecturers want the reps to call them Dr. I prefer to be called Ben, because at the end of the day, I know I am not any better than they are.Yeah, I was just looking for something to give you a hard time about. :laugh:I don't know the answer to this. If you ask me about my office I would say I have one associate working for me rather than one doctor. I think you might need to lighten up with the be proud to be optometrists. I think the majority of us are proud, but since the general public has no idea what an optometrist is, I have found it easier to say I am an eye doctor when asked what I do.I think the real question is why does it matter if a person with a doctorate calls himself doctor? Do you really believe that by OD's and DC's calling themselves doctor it lessens the value of being a doctor? And if so, do you really measure your worth based on the public's perception of what a doctor is? Please don't tell me it's because you are concerned about patient's being deceived, because all that should matter is that they receive quality care. My favorite MD point is the study that showed patients would prefer to see an ophthalmologist for their eyecare if given a choice once they knew the education difference. You can tell MD's don't need a study to be scientific if it proves their point. I could perform the same type of study and go through the extensive training OD's go through with regards to spectacle correction and contact lens fitting, compare that to seeing the tech in an MD office and "prove" that patients would prefer to see OD's for all primary eyecare.

No, you missed my point. You asked whether I feel others with doctorates, such as optometrists and chiros, lessen the value of being a "doctor" or whether by doing so, I'm concerned with patients being deceived. No, no, no. While most people are not quite savvy enough to distinguish between MD, PHD, OD, DPM, DVM, DDS, etc., I think your average joe knows that the dentist he sees isn't a physician, per se, or that the eye doctor he sees for glasses can also perform a bunionectomy. Some pts have no clue, but by in large, most have some idea that not all doctors are the same.

Also, I have no problem with the title Dr. So-and-so. HOWEVER, I do have a problem with any non-physician professional, or his/her staff, saying things like "the doctor will see you now" or "young doctors" or "we have three doctors working in our office" or things like that. What's the difference?

The title + a qualifier is sufficient to explain who you are and what you do, for the most part, and is NOT deceptive; however, if you say something like "I am a doctor" when asked what you do, or "Jane is a doctor" without explaining "of optometry" or "I am an optometrist", you are inadvertantly deceiving (or perhaps directly deceiving) others into assuming you are a physician. Even though, technically, you are a "doctor", the general public assumes someone who is a "doctor" is an MD or DO, not a JD, PhD, OD, etc.

Saying I'm Dr. Chudner, I'm an optometrist is direct and says it all; saying "I'm Dr. Chudner" leaves room to guess what kind, but saying "I'm a doctor" sort of implies you're an MD or DO. Yeah, it's semantics, but my point is, if you're an OD, say you're an optometrist. I say I'm a psychiatrist or a physician, I almost never say I'm a "doctor".
 
Whoever earns their doctorate degree after years of hard work deserves the right to be called a doctor, be it OD, PH.D., PharmD, etc.. Prozack, if you don't want your patients to address you by doctor, then it's your personal preference. Don't try to propagate your opinion onto others. The world doesn't revolve around you. Thanks.

So, I wonder if you'd say the same thing if your lawyer went around calling himself "doctor". What do you think? You're a pre-opt student, so you feel strongly about this, but what if you were a pre-law student. Lawyers earn a BA or BS and then go to school 3+ years for a DOCTOR of Jurisprudence (JD) degree, must pass a grueling bar exam, and many do a clerkship that can be as lengthy as 1-3 years (depending on where and type of clerkship). Clerkships are not required, but they are similar to residencies. I had a classmate in law school who did a three year post JD clerkship with the Ohio Supreme Court. His clerkship was not any less difficult than Dr. Chudner's contact lens residency, or was it? He also only got paid about 20-30K a year despite hefty student loans. Many law grads do a post doc fellowship in legal academics. Lawyers earn a doctoral degree just the same as ODs and DCs and EdDs and PharmDs. Now, I heard someone say something like "well, a JD is only 3 to 3.5 years and not 4 so it's not a true doctorate! Uuuh, yah, and? So length of a degree is what determines who gets called doctor? You know, the academic regalia at graduation from law school is doctoral, the degree is a doctorate. A JD is - to a PhD for tenure in all universities and colleges. A DPT degree is only 3 years, but no one complains when a PT is called doctor, right (cause, it's health care!). Many PhD degrees can be earned 3 years after a BA/BS. You can now earn a DO degree in three full academic years at some medical schools, such as Lake Erie College of Osteo Med. Many PharmD and DDS programs are only 3 years. Does that mean they are less of doctorates than ODs?

Also, you can get into many DDS, DO, OD, and PharmD degree programs WITHOUT an earned BA/BS. You can't even enter an ABA approved law school without a BA/BS. How many PharmDs and DCs have a mere 6 years of post secondary education compared to 7-8 for lawyers, but no one seems to be upset if they are called doctor. My own dentist went to dental school at UMich after 3 years of undergrad with no degree.

However, just because of custom, lawyers don't use the title. If they started to insist on it, I wonder if you'd think they are entitled to it. What do you think? What do you think the public would say about it? Damn dirty shyster lawyers! They don't deserve it!

What about the dude who got a PhD in art history? Or better yet, a doctorate of musical arts? What do you think? I think it's common among health care professionals to insist on the professional title as it makes them...well, more like physicians, right?

Do you think a lawyer who signs his name John Smith, J.D., Law Doctor, is being deceptive or arrogant? What about Dr. John Smith, Musician? I'm not saying they don't deserve it, but what I am saying is optometrists, chiros, pods, dentists, psychologists, and many other health care providers get their panties in a bunch if the title is not used, but many others who earn a legitimate professional or academic doctorate, like lawyers, pharmacists, and physical therapists (DPT) often go by their first name or Mr./Ms. nd not doctor. Many PhDs in humanities don't get bent out of shape if they are addressed as Bob or Mr. or Mrs., but how many dentists or chiros don't care?

You know who seems to be the most adamant about invoking the title, based on my experience? EdDs and chiropractors. When I was in high school, we had a pompous jackass of an asst. principal who earned an EdD in something like "curriculum" and design and insisted everyone, other teachers included, call him Dr. Armstrong. I guess it's okay, but he was the type to do this even outside of work!

I was at a Belle Tire once getting new tires on my car. The tire guy asked for a "Mr. Smith" in the lobby, and this arrogant little jerk yells "um, that's DOCTOR SMITH!" at the top of his lungs. Later, when I was paying, I heard the clerk as what kind of "doctor" Dr Smith and he said, "I'm a chiropractic physician!" I laughed and damn near snorted my latte out of my nose. I didn't wet myself when he called out "Mr. S!" Who cares; it's Belle Tire for God's sake. Sheesh.
 
No, you missed my point. You asked whether I feel others with doctorates, such as optometrists and chiros, lessen the value of being a "doctor" or whether by doing so, I'm concerned with patients being deceived. No, no, no. While most people are not quite savvy enough to distinguish between MD, PHD, OD, DPM, DVM, DDS, etc., I think your average joe knows that the dentist he sees isn't a physician, per se, or that the eye doctor he sees for glasses can also perform a bunionectomy. Some pts have no clue, but by in large, most have some idea that not all doctors are the same.

Also, I have no problem with the title Dr. So-and-so. HOWEVER, I do have a problem with any non-physician professional, or his/her staff, saying things like "the doctor will see you now" or "young doctors" or "we have three doctors working in our office" or things like that. What's the difference?

The title + a qualifier is sufficient to explain who you are and what you do, for the most part, and is NOT deceptive; however, if you say something like "I am a doctor" when asked what you do, or "Jane is a doctor" without explaining "of optometry" or "I am an optometrist", you are inadvertantly deceiving (or perhaps directly deceiving) others into assuming you are a physician. Even though, technically, you are a "doctor", the general public assumes someone who is a "doctor" is an MD or DO, not a JD, PhD, OD, etc.

Saying I'm Dr. Chudner, I'm an optometrist is direct and says it all; saying "I'm Dr. Chudner" leaves room to guess what kind, but saying "I'm a doctor" sort of implies you're an MD or DO. Yeah, it's semantics, but my point is, if you're an OD, say you're an optometrist. I say I'm a psychiatrist or a physician, I almost never say I'm a "doctor".

For what its worth, I usually type/say doctor just because its easier to say/type. Plus I can't spell some of the specialties.
 
Also, I have no problem with the title Dr. So-and-so. HOWEVER, I do have a problem with any non-physician professional, or his/her staff, saying things like "the doctor will see you now" or "young doctors" or "we have three doctors working in our office" or things like that.
I think you need to relax a little about this. My staff, as does the staff of every OD I know, says "the doctor will be in to see you shortly". Patients that have come to our office see optometrist several places starting with the yellow page ad, to our signage, right up through the paperwork they are asked to fill out. There is no deception, intentional or otherwise.
The title + a qualifier is sufficient to explain who you are and what you do, for the most part, and is NOT deceptive; however, if you say something like "I am a doctor" when asked what you do, or "Jane is a doctor" without explaining "of optometry" or "I am an optometrist", you are inadvertantly deceiving (or perhaps directly deceiving) others into assuming you are a physician. Even though, technically, you are a "doctor", the general public assumes someone who is a "doctor" is an MD or DO, not a JD, PhD, OD, etc.
It is not my responsibility to make sure the population is educated as to what types of doctors there are. I feel no shame in saying that I am an eye doctor, nor do I feel the need to qualify that by saying optometrist. I am certainly not trying to inflate my ego by pretending I am a physician.
 
Of all the people entitled to use "Dr.", PhD's are the most deserving and are highest up the pecking order as far as academic degrees. For an MD or anyone to disparage this usage is the height of pomposity, stupidity, and ignorance. The other "doctoral" degrees are awarded for what basically amounts to trade school. The PhD confers on its bearer the recognition that he or she has the proven ability to advance knowledge through original research, rather than merely regurgitating facts and manipulating instruments. Granted that the other doctoral degrees require a lot of hard work and mastery of skills, but they don't indicate much of any capacity for original thought.

One of the few things that impresses me about JD's is that amazingly enough they haven't become arrogant enough to call themselves "Doctor" -- proving that even lawyers have some limits. Most law students are bright enough to realize that only JSD's deserve to be called Dr., and they realize that the JD used to be a LLB until a few lawyers decided that LLB wasn't a worthy title to signify their vast accomplishment in coasting through three years of law school, especially when an LLM is a higher degree.
 
Of all the people entitled to use "Dr.", PhD's are the most deserving and are highest up the pecking order as far as academic degrees. For an MD or anyone to disparage this usage is the height of pomposity, stupidity, and ignorance. The other "doctoral" degrees are awarded for what basically amounts to trade school. The PhD confers on its bearer the recognition that he or she has the proven ability to advance knowledge through original research, rather than merely regurgitating facts and manipulating instruments. Granted that the other doctoral degrees require a lot of hard work and mastery of skills, but they don't indicate much of any capacity for original thought.

Wow, your post sounds pretentious. I disagree w/ what you said b/c whose to say that MDs, DDSs, ODs, and whoever else ARE NOT on the same intellect as PhDs? It is completely subjective and is like comparing apples to oranges. And who gives a hoot if you have your PhD, its the MDs, DDS, etc that are raking in the cash. In my subjective opinion, better to have the lifestyle of a MD, DDS, etc than some lab PhD.
 
Sadly, this thread has degenerated into a horrible tedious mess.

This happens every once in a while on these forums. People all pile onto each other, accusing each other of puffery, piss and moan about who should be allowed to call themselves "doctor" and then throw around limp examples of PharmDs and lawyers technically being doctors but not calling themselves that or PhDs being the only "true" doctors.

It's an incredibly useless debate and it's incredibly wasteful.

As Dr. Chudner pointed out (and when I say Dr. Chudner, I mean Dr. Chudner the OPTOMETRIST who is NOT IN ANY WAY qualified to run a code, or tube a patient, or deliver a baby, or respond in a crowded theater if someone asks "is there a doctor in the house?") virtually every optometrist out there has the word "optometrist" or "optometry" scattered all throughout their advertisements, signage, stationary such that there is no misrepresentation going on. This holds true for every podiatrist, dentist, chiropractor etc. etc. that I have seen.

We can blather on about the use of the term "optometric physician" or "chiropractic physician" again if people really feel the need but that has been hashed over dozens of times and the explanation explained dozens of times. Yes....I acknowledge that there is probably an optometrist or two, or a chiropractor or two out there who get off on calling themselves a "chiropractic physician" but 99.99% of "non physician" providers are content with their job title and don't need to stroke their own ego.

This thread is starting to really bite...... I recommend closing it.👎
 
Wow, your post sounds pretentious. I disagree w/ what you said b/c whose to say that MDs, DDSs, ODs, and whoever else ARE NOT on the same intellect as PhDs? It is completely subjective and is like comparing apples to oranges. And who gives a hoot if you have your PhD, its the MDs, DDS, etc that are raking in the cash. In my subjective opinion, better to have the lifestyle of a MD, DDS, etc than some lab PhD.

Where did I say that other "Doctors" don't have the same intellect as PhD's?. My post stated that the PhD recognizes the capability for original thought, while a DDS, for example does not. I'm sure there are DDS's who would outscore PhD's on "intelligence" tests, but you could obtain a DDS (or MD or OD) without developing a single original thought or advancing the world's knowledge.

As far as the pecking order of degrees, hang around any institution full of doctoral types and it won't take you long to find out which one is considered most prestigious. Obtaining a PhD takes a much greater commitment of time and intellectual and emotional energy than obtaining an MD, OD, or DDS. There is a much greater intellectual rigor involved, and therefore greater respect is accorded to them. The irony is that lay people (and occasionally bearers of health-related doctoral degrees) get in a huff about PhD's calling themselves "Doctor", while the PhD's don't have that issue with non-PhD's. My main point is that people who insist that PhD's should not be entitled to call themselves "Doctor" don't know what they're talking about.
 
be nice, zack is alright, what he is says is true, most people associated doctor with a MD (not even a DO) and using doctor without any other clarifying statement can cause some confusion.

and while some ppl dont like to work weekends, others do. most people who work weekends make it so they have mon/tues off or half days. this way they can pick up their kids, be there for t-ball games or even coach soccer teams. to each their own.
 
If you search the optometry forum, every once in a while you'll see ProZackMI have something negative or smart@ss to say... you can even smell the superiority complex in his politically correct BS way of putting down people. I said it before, and I'll say it again ProZackMI... you're just a ****ing psychiatrist, which means, more likely than not.. you graduated near the bottom of your class at some **** school, with some **** board score. Stop trying to validate your self worth by putting people down with your psychology 101 BS. "narcissistic," "grandiose"? what.. did you look up your little green book before posting? I'm glad you have pointed out many problems with psychiatry, perhaps you can add "too much time surfing, too little time seeing patients" to your list. Do us all a favor, there are services out there that will say whatever you want to hear for only $50, I encourage you to explore it.

As far as the title issue is concern, you are not anymore qualified to be called "doctor" than any optometrist, PharmD, or denist out there. Do you honestly think that your 8 weeks of rotation in internal medicine makes you that much more knowlegable about internal medicine than any other health care providers out there? I personally doubt it and for you to say yes would mean that you know exactly how each curriculums of different entails... which you may actually know considering how much free time you have.

Sorry this have nothing to do with original post, which I found pretty informative.
 
If you search the optometry forum, every once in a while you'll see ProZackMI have something negative or smart@ss to say... you can even smell the superiority complex in his politically correct BS way of putting down people. I said it before, and I'll say it again ProZackMI... you're just a ****ing psychiatrist, which means, more likely than not.. you graduated near the bottom of your class at some **** school, with some **** board score. Stop trying to validate your self worth by putting people down with your psychology 101 BS. "narcissistic," "grandiose"? what.. did you look up your little green book before posting? I'm glad you have pointed out many problems with psychiatry, perhaps you can add "too much time surfing, too little time seeing patients" to your list. Do us all a favor, there are services out there that will say whatever you want to hear for only $50, I encourage you to explore it.

Okay, that should be the nail in the coffin for this thread. Thankyou, hopefulmed, for such an insightful post.
 
If you search the optometry forum, every once in a while you'll see ProZackMI have something negative or smart@ss to say... you can even smell the superiority complex in his politically correct BS way of putting down people. I said it before, and I'll say it again ProZackMI... you're just a ****ing psychiatrist, which means, more likely than not.. you graduated near the bottom of your class at some **** school, with some **** board score. Stop trying to validate your self worth by putting people down with your psychology 101 BS. "narcissistic," "grandiose"? what.. did you look up your little green book before posting? I'm glad you have pointed out many problems with psychiatry, perhaps you can add "too much time surfing, too little time seeing patients" to your list. Do us all a favor, there are services out there that will say whatever you want to hear for only $50, I encourage you to explore it.

As far as the title issue is concern, you are not anymore qualified to be called "doctor" than any optometrist, PharmD, or denist out there. Do you honestly think that your 8 weeks of rotation in internal medicine makes you that much more knowlegable about internal medicine than any other health care providers out there? I personally doubt it and for you to say yes would mean that you know exactly how each curriculums of different entails... which you may actually know considering how much free time you have.

Sorry this have nothing to do with original post, which I found pretty informative.

You are a close minded fool. His original posts were quite negative, but the patience of such folks as KHE and Dr. Chudner convinced him that optometry is more than just glorified tech work.

I see what he was trying to do here, it just came off a tad more combative than I'm sure he meant.

Oh, and way to insult psychiatrists by making blanket statements about their med school careers. Nicely done taking the high road.
 
You are a close minded fool. His original posts were quite negative, but the patience of such folks as KHE and Dr. Chudner convinced him that optometry is more than just glorified tech work.


I am inclined to think that hopefulmed was referring to Dr. Chudner's post... thus the term "original post". But if I'm wrong, then feel free to set the record straight hopefulmed.

Also, where are the admins out there monitoring the harsh discussions on this thread. Some of them are a little... grandiose... *lol* and, imho, cross the borders of good debate. Some are just downright mean. Close the thread, close the thread, close the thread!👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom