Originally posted by Neurogirl:
•To the above poster,
"Extreme bias"?
"Rampant prejudice"?
Don't you think you're being just a little histrionic? I'm not saying that prejudice doesn't exist, but based on my experiences at several different allopathic hospitals, it's hardly extreme or rampant. Actually, I've never had ANY problems (not with patients or physicians). I'm sure that some areas of the country are worse than others, but in the midwest, most MDs and DOs get along quite well.
To the original poster:
For privilege/reimbursement purposes, hospitals and insurers are only concerned that you are BC and could care less whether the certifying board is osteopathic or allopathic. Some employers will have a preference, but most won't care. Also, depending on the specialty and the attitudes of the individuals in any particular group, some will prefer to stay "pure", ie., MD or DO only, while others will have no preference. In general, academics and surgical specialties are really the last bastions of the "MD only" club and even those areas are starting to loosen up. I can assure you that as a DO, no matter what field you go into, when you finish residency, you'll have multiple job offers, and more patients than you can handle.
Neurogirl DO, MPH•••
Actually, my experience differ wildly from your own. Please realize that I have already stated that discrepancies and prejudice that I have observed, are in fact, unfortunate and poorly justified. My description was rather nice when compared to some actual ?every day? prejudice I am privy to.
You need to appreciate the fact that you work in an entirely different region of the country. Additionally, a lot of what I am referring to is said behind osteopaths backs. What is public is the fact that in our hospital, DO?s simply don?t get the competitive jobs, and that?s not for a lack of trying.
You have admittedly stated that ?academics and surgical specialties are really the last bastions of the "MD only" club? For someone going into primary care or a less competitive field your statement may not mean a lot. At the same time, you have lumped a huge percentage of medicine into this seemingly ?last bastion?. From your comments one can surmise that if you want to do surgery or any kind of academic medicine than you will be disadvantaged. I believe it extends well beyond this expansive ?last bastion? but our experiences are perhaps different. The fact of the matter is that when there is an MD and a DO going head to head, all things being equal, I have seen the MD get the spot 9 times out of ten.
Again, I emphasize that this doesn?t reflect on the knowledge or skill of the osteopath. It reflects on ?rampant? and filthy ?prejudice? against osteopaths that should not exist. When osteopaths are disadvantaged in this way, how could you call it anything but ?rampant prejudice? and ?extreme bias?. If MD?s were treated similarly I would be equally miffed.
The bottom line is if your career interests are in primary care and less competitive specialties, you wont notice this ?prejudice? quite as much. But for those osteopaths who are trying to get into radiology, urology, optho, academics etc etc, they can probably tell you first hand that the bias, even extreme bias does exist. It?s unfortunate and troubling, but it exists nonetheless.
This doesn?t mean you cant do what you want to do. It simply means the barriers to success are much much stronger. I?m not saying there aren?t orthopods or well published DO?s. What I?m saying is when you compare sheer numbers, the MD?s have em beat 9 to 1. It?s unfortunate and sad, but it?s the truth. You can get there as a DO, but the road is much more difficult to circumnavigate.
