California Letter/License

[maji]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Just a quick question. I am an IMG currently a PGY-2 AP/CP training and was looking into getting my papers in order for a possible future in California. It says in the packet for license/letter that all IMGs require 4 months of POSTgraduate training in general medicine.
How are pathologists supposed to fulfill this? Does transfusion medicine count since we do have direct patient care? How do california AP/CP graduates get the certification without an intern year?

Any insight into this would be most appreciated!

Thanks,

Maji

 

[deleted314957]

Just a quick question. I am an IMG currently a PGY-2 AP/CP training and was looking into getting my papers in order for a possible future in California. It says in the packet for license/letter that all IMGs require 4 months of POSTgraduate training in general medicine.
How are pathologists supposed to fulfill this? Does transfusion medicine count since we do have direct patient care? How do california AP/CP graduates get the certification without an intern year?

Any insight into this would be most appreciated!

Thanks,

Maji

if that is the case then they probably don't. and you can bet that the state doesn't care weather it is convenient or not.

 

[KCShaw]

Not that they will buy this, but you probably have 4 years of postgraduate training in general medicine, called 'medical school'. Very few people in the U.S. go to medical school without a previous degree, at any rate. Beyond that, since general medicine is not defined one should be able to argue that pathology includes general medicine, which it does, just not a lot of direct treatment. Argumentative nonsense aside, no idea how the locals do it.

 

[maji]

The text is worded as follows:

GENERAL MEDICINE TRAINING REQUIREMENT

To qualify for licensure in California, applicants who are graduates of an international medical school must complete at least four months of postgraduate training in GENERAL MEDICINE as part of the requirement. Applicants who are graduates of a U.S. or Canadian medical school, who have not completed postgraduate training required for licensure by July 1, 1990, must also complete four months of training in GENERAL MEDICINE prior to licensure. The GENERAL MEDICINE requirement may be satisfied by actual clinical practice where the applicant has direct patient care responsibilities in any particular specialty or subspecialty area for at least four months.

I am sure there must be a way around it, or a way path qualifies, since the same rules apply to cali ap/cp residents. I did not make up the caps, thats how it is written in the form.

Any more ideas are appreciated!

 

[sirenomelia]

A friend of mine dealt with this when he licensed in Cali after medical school in China. He asked permission in his residency for elective time with some IM fleas for some pseudorotations to follow them around a little bit without being beaten up and taking call and crap like that and then had those people forward a letter that he had spent time with them.

 

[pxjx]

I don't know the specifics regarding IMGs but D.O.s have the same dilemma, in which they are required to do 4 months of general medicine. I called the Osteopathic Medical Board of California and spoke to someone about this issue. She informed me that any rotations in pathology where you have patient contact will count towards general medicine--ie Transfusion medicine and Blood banking rotations, FNAs if you are performing them, Bone Marrow Bx if you are performing them, etc. They also informed me that they have agreements with most programs in CA regarding this and it usually isn't problem getting a license. I am sure the same applies to IMGs.

 

[maji]

Thanks pxjx! We only have 3 months of transfusion medicine, just shy of the reqirement. My program we don't actively do FNAs, like FNA clinic or anything, and I have only performed one myself. I could do a 1 month elective in TM my fourth year I guess to be eligible, but it pains me to think of spending EXTRA time on TM.

 

[KCShaw]

I would be inclined to call them and ask, rather than put faith in an online forum only to discover later that it either isn't enough, or you wasted time doing something you otherwise didn't need or want to do. Pathology, as well as a small proportion of other specialties, fall through the cracks with these kinds of policy statements, sometimes intentionally but sometimes not. It may be that the intent was simply to prevent researchers or admins or completely untrained graduates from the junior medical college of some upstart tribal coalition in southwest Antarctica, or whatever from getting fully licensed and having a little side business, not to make pathologists go above and beyond their AP/CP training. If TM or rare FNA/BM biopsies were the only thing 'allowed', what do AP only residents do? Count their cytology & heme rotations too? Why not autopsy? Or surg path -- lots of small parts of patients, at least? The rest of CP -- lots of fluid from patients? Frankly it really makes no sense to have to do something more or different if one is coming from an ACGME accredited program, thus I'd go to the source; probably ask a supervisor, not the first person who answers the phone.

 

[maji]

Yeh. I just figured I would see if anyone had dealt with it first hand before being placed on call for 30 minutes while trying to figure it out.