Haga

Hotter Than Black Pepper
10+ Year Member
Apr 6, 2006
45
0
WV
Status
Other Health Professions Student
I'm going into Speech Pathology, but I am wondering since Audiology switch over to a clinical degree are they referred to as Dr. (insert last name).

IMO I think that they should because, I think since Optometrist are considered Doctors, then Audiologist recieve the same right.


But in general are Audiologist with AuD's referred to as Dr. xxxxxxxx?
 

cidanu

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Feb 16, 2009
345
0
Status
Rehab Sci Student
not always. you've hit on a heated debate.
 

DrumHead

10 Sir Tim Penny
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Mar 28, 2001
68
2
WA, USA
Status
Rehab Sci Student
It is usually up to the Au.D. themselves. Some in the clinical/medical setting choose not to use it so as to not lead the patient to think they are a physician. Others like to seem more casual or try to reduce doctor visit anxiety in their patient so they wear jeans and T-shirts and don't call themselves "Dr."

I will call myself "Doctor" when I'm done. I'm earning it. lol
 

skypt123

10+ Year Member
Feb 16, 2009
22
0
Augusta, GA
Status
Pre-Rehab Sci [General]
I feel the same way. I want to be referred to as Dr. We went through 4 years of blood, sweat, and cerumen. We've more than earned it.:)
 

Dustbug10

Year IV
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Feb 1, 2009
475
0
Little Rock, AR
www.facebook.com
Status
Rehab Sci Student
I'm already making my girlfriend call me 'Dr.'. As a matter of fact, I might have my name legally changed when it is all said and done and just omit my first name altogether.
 
Aug 7, 2009
1,052
0
south africa
Status
:DPsychologist we r doctor's BUT we have a phd ...if u dont have a doctors degree how can u be a doctor but what abt respect ...lol BUT the idea is it doesnt matter if u r doctor or mr or prof WE r ther to help :D
and get some bling:love:
 
Nov 23, 2009
3
0
Status
Other Health Professions Student
You can call yourself doctor or be referred as one if you or someone uses finger quotes while you say "Doctor". Other than that no. There is no debate involved, they only reason some want to use doctor is to get credit for something they havent done. Its really that simple.
The matter is made even more confusing for the public when audies insist on always wearing a white lab coat. Even though a new medical doctor will make approx 5 times what what a new audie will make, they have to go through 10 times as much to get the degree. Just be happy with Aud. You would resent it too if people could go get a weekend certification and use the title Aud.
On another subject, hearing impaired people are becoming much tech savy and motivated to have more control over thier own treatment, as they should have. This might hopefully end the monopoly that hearing aid mfr's and audies have had in the "treatment" of the hearing impaired.
 
Apr 21, 2009
74
0
Status
Rehab Sci Student
You can call yourself doctor or be referred as one if you or someone uses finger quotes while you say "Doctor". Other than that no. There is no debate involved, they only reason some want to use doctor is to get credit for something they havent done. Its really that simple.
The matter is made even more confusing for the public when audies insist on always wearing a white lab coat. Even though a new medical doctor will make approx 5 times what what a new audie will make, they have to go through 10 times as much to get the degree. Just be happy with Aud. You would resent it too if people could go get a weekend certification and use the title Aud.
On another subject, hearing impaired people are becoming much tech savy and motivated to have more control over thier own treatment, as they should have. This might hopefully end the monopoly that hearing aid mfr's and audies have had in the "treatment" of the hearing impaired.
gpxfiles77, not sure if you're in an Au.D. program because you seem to have your facts confused. Yes there is a debate involved and yes audiologist's DO earn the scholarly respect to be referred to as Dr., whether or not they choose to use that title. Again, in certain hospitals audiologist's are required to wear lab coats, whether or not they choose to do so. The lab coats purpose is not to depict how many years of schooling you have had or which degree is mounted on your wall, but for sanitary reasons. If you have ever stepped in a hospital setting, notice that speech-language pathologist's also wear lab coats.

I will actually be switching careers from audiology to medicine, come next semester, but the title of doctor does NOT only belong to a medical doctor. You said, "just be happy with the aud degree," however, do you even know what Au.D. stands for? Doctor of Audiology, not person of audiology, not Master of Science. We do not have a 2 year master's degree and walk around proclaiming we are Doctors, it is the degree we receive at graduation.

M.D.'s do not resent individuals with an Au.D., Sc.D., Ph.D., Pharm. D., DDS/DMD - they are completely different degrees earned in a different manner and used in a different manner.
 
Last edited:

teucer

I'll take an M-14 any day
10+ Year Member
Dec 14, 2008
200
0
Arkansas
Status
Rehab Sci Student
I know at least one anesthesiologist that resents audiologists being called doctor. I believe that there would be less resentment if all Au.D.s got a Ph.D. degree. Semantics semantics...
 
Nov 23, 2009
3
0
Status
Other Health Professions Student
But you should still use finger quotes when referring to yourself or another aud as a doctor.

Its not that hard plus its good excessive for the arms. If you have a lot of documentation in Microsoft format, you can use the find and replace command from the edit menu. For example if an aud is Dr. Smith, or Joe Smith Aud, you could do a batch find and replace to change them all to "Dr." Smith. Customers (not patients) should also be instructed to use the finger quote system. Perhaps it can be printed on the bottom of your business card.

Some of the other professions that should also do this are.

"Dr." of chiropractic medicine
"Dr." of acupuncture
"Dr." Psychic friends network professional
"Dr." of Holistic B. S.
And many others...

Since there should absolutely be an easy way for the public to distinguish between MD's everyone else, we should use the quote system for sure.

Many PhD's work very hard in many fields, like chemistry, engineering, philosophy, etc. They have very rigorous course loads and expectations. They should use the PhD and the end of their name and not have to be lumped together with fields that follow watered down science.

So to review.

Dr. = MD

"Dr." = One of the many half educated or fake, pseudo science fields created for profit, not to serve the customer (not called a patient here) as a priority. Often this titles are created by large business, such as hearing aid manufacturers, in order to confuse the public and lead them to believe the "Dr." follows medical standards and ethics, has a medical degree and has their best interest in heart. What a better way to make a profit than to make customers think you have doctors working for you and yet not have to pay them or have any liability at all! Awesome! White lab coats are cheap! Many "Dr."s get into the field with the best of intentions, only to realize later who they really work for. Not completely their fault.

,PHD = Someone who has taken years real courses based on the scientific method not watered down science or pseudo science, or some other credible method that applies to the other disciplines.
 

DrumHead

10 Sir Tim Penny
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Mar 28, 2001
68
2
WA, USA
Status
Rehab Sci Student
Troll on MY SDN board? It's more likely thank you think.
 
Sep 23, 2009
31
0
Status
Pre-Rehab Sci [General]
I think the finger quote is stupid, it totally undermines the profession as a whole and would look ridiculous. M.Ds need to realize that certain educational requirements do make a person deserving of the Dr. title. I know there are many Au.Ds that wish that a Masters was still sufficient, but since it isn't and now audiologists need to be in school for 8 years, they have earned their doctorate. I would not consider a Ph.D in psych as any more knowledgeable about their area of expertise, but I would still consider them doctors.

Whether or not an Au.D refers to him/herself as a Dr. is up to them. I think people that use Audiologists understand the difference and a Doctorate is a Doctorate.

Regardless of all of this, referring to yourself as a Dr. in the workplace or when describing your job is one thing. I think that anyone (even M.Ds) that expect people to refer to them as Dr.s outside the work place are D-Bags!
 

teucer

I'll take an M-14 any day
10+ Year Member
Dec 14, 2008
200
0
Arkansas
Status
Rehab Sci Student
This sort of trollish commentary is actually exactly what my dad would say about the Au.D. He is just as offensive and disrespectful when discussing this topic with me as well.

While I am not a proponent of requiring audiologists to obatain a doctoral degree to engage in their professions I do not agree that what we learn is "watered down science". The scientific topics that Au.D. students are required to study may not have a direct clinical correlate but it is far from watered down. Anyone who has studied psychoacoustics will absolutely agree with me.

Again, I think the line between an Au.D. and an M.D. is more than stark. However, the deliniation between Ph.D. and an Au.D. is very slim. Au.D. students should not be belittled for what they have been able to accomplish. Au.D. students are the same bright, intelligent and motivated people that Ph.D. students are. They can teach classes on the subject, as Ph.D.s can, just as easily as they can clinically practice in the field of audiology. Some Ph.D.s are clinical audiologists as well. The major deliniation between the Au.D. and the Ph.D. is their expected career path after graduation; the Ph.D. plans on doing more instruction and research, the Au.D. plans on working as a clinician.

Remember to have intelligent discourse; at the very least, remember that you're barking up the wrong tree if you plan on coming in and lambasting the Au.D. students in the Au.D. thread. I, for one, will feel as though I have achieved self-actualization if I ever complete this program; some people just aren't cut out to be M.D.s. Whether or not you believe in the doctoral audiologist is one thing but posting messages to make everyone studying in the field feel bad is just being mean-spirited.
 

teucer

I'll take an M-14 any day
10+ Year Member
Dec 14, 2008
200
0
Arkansas
Status
Rehab Sci Student
I do concede that I have not yet considered, nor researched, the role of the hearing aid manufacturers sofar as their hand in the creation of the Au.D. It would make good study to find more information as to the lobbying of groups that stood to make a profit by the creation of the Au.D., including but not limited to hearing aid manufacturers and universities themselves.
 

chicoborja

Clinical Audiologist
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Nov 13, 2002
203
0
Visit site
Status
1) Hearing aid manufacturers did not play a significant role in moving from the masters to the AuD.

2) The difference between the AuD and the PhD is more than slight. Although there are many AuD students who certainly are more than capable of completing the PhD, most do not and some are not capable. The difference between these two groups of AuD students is somewhat irrelevant if neither complete the PhD. The point is that when one compares the AuD to the PhD + clinical component, there is no advantage of the AuD other than a savings of time. The clinical PhD will take 1 to 2 years longer. In that time courses in research and electives in other fields will be taken. Lastly, the qualifying exams and dissertation project will be completed. In the end even if the clinical PhD becomes a clinician they will have the tools to best evaluate current clinical research and implement best practices. When it comes to hearing aid dispensing, this is not a minor point. There are many hearing aid manufacturers each with their own line of products. How can you help your client get the best hearing aid for their money without the tools to evaluate current clinical research? This is especially true since textbooks typically lag behind what is currently available in the current hearing aid product line. Just to give you an example, tell me which is more important for speech understanding, Phonak's EchoBlock, Siemens' e2e Wireless 2.0, or Oticon's Tri-State Noise Management? It's important to be able understand evidence-based practice and being able to do this seems to be much more natural with PhD training.

Note:even some MDs erroneously reject evidence-based medicine thinking that it is a cookbook approach.
 

cidanu

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Feb 16, 2009
345
0
Status
Rehab Sci Student
Found this on the NYS Office of the Professions Website:
Using the Title "doctor"

Licensed individuals who have earned a doctorate degree may use the title "doctor," provided they disclose the field in which they hold the doctorate. An earned doctorate is a doctoral degree conferred by a recognized college or university authorized to confer doctoral degrees in the state (or, for foreign schools, in the country) in which it is located. Licensees in the health professions may not use the title "doctor" when offering to perform professional services without indicating the profession in which the licensee holds the doctorate. For example, for an individual with a Ph.D. in Music who holds a license in speech-language pathology to use the title, "doctor," he or she must indicate that his or her doctorate is in music.


http://www.op.nysed.gov/speechguidedoctor.htm
 

cidanu

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Feb 16, 2009
345
0
Status
Rehab Sci Student
Chicoborja, I don't doubt that Ph.D. students receive a much more in-depth research training than Au.D. students. I'm wondering how you assess the value of the Au.D. capstone project or doctoral thesis. Is research required for Au.D. students at your school? Do students obtain benefit from it?
 

chicoborja

Clinical Audiologist
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Nov 13, 2002
203
0
Visit site
Status
Chicoborja, I don't doubt that Ph.D. students receive a much more in-depth research training than Au.D. students. I'm wondering how you assess the value of the Au.D. capstone project or doctoral thesis. Is research required for Au.D. students at your school? Do students obtain benefit from it?
The quality of AuD capstone projects is incredibly variable from school to school. At my school, for example, most are a joke. However, I have electronic copies of some research projects of AuD students from other schools where it seemed that it was equivalent to a masters thesis or better. However, this does not appear to be the norm.

FYI...the high-quality AuD student capstones that I am referring to are from U of Maryland. If I were not geographically handicapped and had known about this program I would have strongly considered applying there.
 

Dustbug10

Year IV
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Feb 1, 2009
475
0
Little Rock, AR
www.facebook.com
Status
Rehab Sci Student
Ooh. That actually happened to a former ENT in this area. He was speeding, drunk, and killed a ballerina in a collision.

Occupational hazard?

No but seriously. Why are you so bitter up there in your ivory tower?
It takes an AuD four years to complete a doctorate. How long does it take to earn an MD? Oh wait... the same. And an MD learns a little about everything in 4 years. An AuD knows everything in the universe about ears and hearing after 4 years (ie, more than an MD would in this area) and are VERY good about staying up-to-date with clinical research findings.

We don't just sell hearing aids to people. We program cochlear implants and bone anchored prosthetic implants (not to mention determining candidacy for those things), we diagnose and treat vestibular disorders, and can identify things seen in a hearing evaluation that are red flags for medical treatment (tumors, etc.)

That being said, I would always introduce myself as a "Doctor of Audiology," but I HIGHLY resent the accusation that audiologists are some kind of salesperson/voodoo hybrid. :mad:

Just because you sold your life away to kiss the ass of your intern/resident/attending/whatever superior you have to cope with until you retire or open your own practice, doesn't mean my degree is any less valuable.
I nailed his wife.. Disregard his douchebagness.
 

DrumHead

10 Sir Tim Penny
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Mar 28, 2001
68
2
WA, USA
Status
Rehab Sci Student
Ooh. That actually happened to a former ENT in this area. He was speeding, drunk, and killed a ballerina in a collision.

Occupational hazard?

No but seriously. Why are you so bitter up there in your ivory tower?
It takes an AuD four years to complete a doctorate. How long does it take to earn an MD? Oh wait... the same. And an MD learns a little about everything in 4 years. An AuD knows everything in the universe about ears and hearing after 4 years (ie, more than an MD would in this area) and are VERY good about staying up-to-date with clinical research findings.

We don't just sell hearing aids to people. We program cochlear implants and bone anchored prosthetic implants (not to mention determining candidacy for those things), we diagnose and treat vestibular disorders, and can identify things seen in a hearing evaluation that are red flags for medical treatment (tumors, etc.)

That being said, I would always introduce myself as a "Doctor of Audiology," but I HIGHLY resent the accusation that audiologists are some kind of salesperson/voodoo hybrid. :mad:

Just because you sold your life away to kiss the ass of your intern/resident/attending/whatever superior you have to cope with until you retire or open your own practice, doesn't mean my degree is any less valuable.
:thumbup:
 

cidanu

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Feb 16, 2009
345
0
Status
Rehab Sci Student
The quality of AuD capstone projects is incredibly variable from school to school. At my school, for example, most are a joke. However, I have electronic copies of some research projects of AuD students from other schools where it seemed that it was equivalent to a masters thesis or better. However, this does not appear to be the norm.

FYI...the high-quality AuD student capstones that I am referring to are from U of Maryland. If I were not geographically handicapped and had known about this program I would have strongly considered applying there.
I visited Maryland and they have a great program. A day and a half in clinic weekly starting the first semester. Strong research professors as well.

In fact now they're offering an Aud/PhD program that's supposed to take 5 years.

If I had known all the advantages of the PhD beforehand I may have decided to go there as well. A friend of mine is in a different PhD program at College Park and he loves the campus and the research community.
 

cidanu

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Feb 16, 2009
345
0
Status
Rehab Sci Student
The quality of AuD capstone projects is incredibly variable from school to school. At my school, for example, most are a joke. However, I have electronic copies of some research projects of AuD students from other schools where it seemed that it was equivalent to a masters thesis or better. However, this does not appear to be the norm.

FYI...the high-quality AuD student capstones that I am referring to are from U of Maryland. If I were not geographically handicapped and had known about this program I would have strongly considered applying there.
also- i know that Maryland students used to have to write a dissertation as part of the AuD program, but now it's been changed to a capstone research project. so that may be why the papers you have are such high quality.
 

chicoborja

Clinical Audiologist
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Nov 13, 2002
203
0
Visit site
Status
No but seriously. Why are you so bitter up there in your ivory tower?
It takes an AuD four years to complete a doctorate. How long does it take to earn an MD? Oh wait... the same. And an MD learns a little about everything in 4 years. An AuD knows everything in the universe about ears and hearing after 4 years (ie, more than an MD would in this area) and are VERY good about staying up-to-date with clinical research findings.

We don't just sell hearing aids to people. We program cochlear implants and bone anchored prosthetic implants (not to mention determining candidacy for those things), we diagnose and treat vestibular disorders, and can identify things seen in a hearing evaluation that are red flags for medical treatment (tumors, etc.)

That being said, I would always introduce myself as a "Doctor of Audiology," but I HIGHLY resent the accusation that audiologists are some kind of salesperson/voodoo hybrid. :mad:

Just because you sold your life away to kiss the ass of your intern/resident/attending/whatever superior you have to cope with until you retire or open your own practice, doesn't mean my degree is any less valuable.

I don't know how far along you are in your program but your comments seem to be rather idealistic. Many of your statements are similar to what would be found in AAA's or ASHA's descriptions of audiologists. I think everyone in this forum is well aware of what an audiologist does. I also disagree with your comparison between the education of MDs and AuDs. There is no comparison between the rigor of the two programs. I also disagree with you on your thoughts that AuDs "know everything in the universe about ears and hearing after 4 years". Can the average AuD pick up a copy of "JASA" or "JARO" and understand the majority of hearing science articles in there? Certainly not! Neither could the average ENT or researcher. My point is that no audiologist, physician, or scientist should be as arrogant as to think that they are "masters of hearing" because you will certainly not know all that there is to know nor will you be able to decipher all of your clients' complaints.
 
Sep 23, 2009
31
0
Status
Pre-Rehab Sci [General]
Do most undergrads not get any experience reading research articles? If so, that is very sad! I feel like EBP and the ability to read a research article should come as second nature to anyone that is planning to pursue an education above a bachelors. It can be tough work understanding some research articles so really any good undergraduate program should prepare their students for this. I am just now applying for grad schools (for my AuD) and I hope that any school I go to will expect their students to be able to read and comprehend these articles. You shouldn't have to get a PhD to know how to research the best possible course of treatment for you patients!
 
Sep 12, 2009
59
0
Status
Pre-Rehab Sci [General]
I hope this is relevant as I have quickly skimmed through only a couple of the last posts. Regarding research, I attended both UC (for undergrad) and CSU (one semester--but 18 credits) schools. Huge difference. I read countless research articles at the UC. The CSU barely touched on research. It was mainly a bunch of info to memorize and regurgitate for exams. The UC was all about critical thinking, reading research, and even replicating some of the studies or have mini group projects, etc. I went from intimidation to finding research thoroughly enjoyable and entertaining. The CSU was high school all over again, just spitting out a bunch of info as quickly as I forgot it all just to ace the tests. It was a joke. I think research is extremely important and should be a huge focus for undergrads for sure.
 
Mar 11, 2012
32
17
Status
Psychology Student
"Can someone who earned a doctorate degree in Field X be referred to as 'doctor'"

I have seen this question all over the internet and on forums. People have all kinds of ideas about this; some of them are spot-on, some are arrogant and ill-informed. The answer to this question isn't that complicated.

If you've earned a doctorate degree, whether that is a MD/DO, PhD (in any field), CScD, EdD, DPT, DC, JD, DDS, AuD, DD, PharmD, PsyD, SLPD, OTD, DNP, ClinSciD, etc., you have earned the right to be referred to as 'Dr. Bennifer Honeypants' (or whatever your name is); if you finished a doctoral degree from a regionally accredited university (this is for the U.S.; not sure how accreditation at universities works in other countries) , you can legitimately and honestly carry the title 'Dr.'

The problem is not with the title 'Dr'...the problem is with people using it inappropriately and/or to mislead. It is unethical for a DPT or AuD(or any non-MD/DO doctor) to enter a patient's hospital room and pretend to be a physician. This works the other way, however; it just as unethical for a MD/DO to enter a physical rehabilitation clinic and let patients believe they are a DPT, or for an MD/DO to enter the physics department at a university and pretend to be a professor of physics.

If an employee at a hospital, with an earned doctorate that is related to the field in which they are working at that hospital, enters a patient's room it is ethical to clarify what field at that hospital they work in (which serves to let the patient know their area of expertise). For instance, the speech-language pathologist with a clinical doctoral degree (SLPD or CScD) at a hospital should introduce themselves to the patient like so: "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I'm your speech-language pathologist today." The DPT with a clinical doctoral degree at a hospital should introduce themselves to the patient like so: "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I'm your physical therapist today." If there is any indication that the patient thinks you are a medical doctor (either through asking you outright or through asking questions that are outside you area of expertise), it is that person's duty to tell the patient, "That's a good question. However, I am not a medical doctor. That would be a great question to ask her/him when you see her/him."). This action absolutely applies to MDs/DOs as well; when seeing a patient at a hospital, the MD/DO should introduce themselves to the patient like so: "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I am your physician today," or "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I am your oncologist." Likewise, if a MD/DO is giving a lecture in a biology department to a class full of PhD candidates, they should tell the room, "Hello. I'm Dr. Honeypants. I am a medical doctor." If you have earned a legitimate doctorate degree from a legitimate university and are on an airplane and someone starts having seizures, and the person next to them shouts out, "Is anyone here a doctor?", you are acting beyond unethically if you rush over and say "I'm a doctor!" when your doctorate degree is a PharmD, SLPD, DPT, etc. and not an MD/DO.

See how easy that is? It seems that most of the arguments about who can and cannot call themselves Doctor on forums and editorials online and elsewhere are nothing more than d*ck measuring contests. If you earned a doctorate from a legitimate university, you have earned the right to be referred to as 'Doctor', but it is YOUR ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY to not misrepresent yourself to others by clarifying exactly what type of doctor you are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DefEarRing

gyngyn

Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Lifetime Donor
7+ Year Member
Nov 4, 2011
24,149
40,104
Status
Attending Physician
"Can someone who earned a doctorate degree in Field X be referred to as 'doctor'"

I have seen this question all over the internet and on forums. People have all kinds of ideas about this; some of them are spot-on, some are arrogant and ill-informed. The answer to this question isn't that complicated.

If you've earned a doctorate degree, whether that is a MD/DO, PhD (in any field), CScD, EdD, DPT, DC, JD, DDS, AuD, DD, PharmD, PsyD, SLPD, OTD, DNP, ClinSciD, etc., you have earned the right to be referred to as 'Dr. Bennifer Honeypants' (or whatever your name is); if you finished a doctoral degree from a regionally accredited university (this is for the U.S.; not sure how accreditation at universities works in other countries) , you can legitimately and honestly carry the title 'Dr.'

The problem is not with the title 'Dr'...the problem is with people using it inappropriately and/or to mislead. It is unethical for a DPT or AuD(or any non-MD/DO doctor) to enter a patient's hospital room and pretend to be a physician. This works the other way, however; it just as unethical for a MD/DO to enter a physical rehabilitation clinic and let patients believe they are a DPT, or for an MD/DO to enter the physics department at a university and pretend to be a professor of physics.

If an employee at a hospital, with an earned doctorate that is related to the field in which they are working at that hospital, enters a patient's room it is ethical to clarify what field at that hospital they work in (which serves to let the patient know their area of expertise). For instance, the speech-language pathologist with a clinical doctoral degree (SLPD or CScD) at a hospital should introduce themselves to the patient like so: "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I'm your speech-language pathologist today." The DPT with a clinical doctoral degree at a hospital should introduce themselves to the patient like so: "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I'm your physical therapist today." If there is any indication that the patient thinks you are a medical doctor (either through asking you outright or through asking questions that are outside you area of expertise), it is that person's duty to tell the patient, "That's a good question. However, I am not a medical doctor. That would be a great question to ask her/him when you see her/him."). This action absolutely applies to MDs/DOs as well; when seeing a patient at a hospital, the MD/DO should introduce themselves to the patient like so: "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I am your physician today," or "Hello, I'm Dr. Bennifer Honeypants. I am your oncologist." Likewise, if a MD/DO is giving a lecture in a biology department to a class full of PhD candidates, they should tell the room, "Hello. I'm Dr. Honeypants. I am a medical doctor." If you have earned a legitimate doctorate degree from a legitimate university and are on an airplane and someone starts having seizures, and the person next to them shouts out, "Is anyone here a doctor?", you are acting beyond unethically if you rush over and say "I'm a doctor!" when your doctorate degree is a PharmD, SLPD, DPT, etc. and not an MD/DO.

See how easy that is? It seems that most of the arguments about who can and cannot call themselves Doctor on forums and editorials online and elsewhere are nothing more than d*ck measuring contests. If you earned a doctorate from a legitimate university, you have earned the right to be referred to as 'Doctor', but it is YOUR ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY to not misrepresent yourself to others by clarifying exactly what type of doctor you are.
Policy on using the title may vary. At our hospital, only physicians and dentists can have "Dr." on their badge or coat and may introduce themselves as "Dr." The degrees may be listed after the name for everyone.
Outside the hospital, we often refer to our colleagues as Doctor, in accordance with what you have outlined.
 
Last edited by a moderator: