I was referring to critical care nurses, who often seem to think they are better than doctors (not in my personal experience, but based on the stories I hear, and what I read in these forums).
I'm not sure what you personally are implying here, but some seem to think that ability to do a technical procedure under the supervision of a doctor (or unsupervised, in rural Kansas), means you essentially providing the same level of care as a physician. Or the ability and legal right to diagnose and treat problems within your narrow scope of practice essentially make you equal to an MD within that scope. Most of us find that a tad cavelier because none of you can possibly know what you don't know. Then you (again, perhaps not jwk personally) cite examples of a dopey acting physician or two, and conclude that medical school is unnecessary to proving comprehensive medical care. I have no problem giving mid-levels credit for their ability to do technical procedures, follow protocols, and think reflexively. I begin to have a problem when they become overconfident and begin to second guess physicians. In some cases they may be right, but in most they are probably wrong.
Resident pay has little to do with the value of our work. Hospitals pay PAs, NPs, and CRNAs more than residents because they have to- it's a free market. Resident choices of where to work are much more limited, and involve factors like prestige and quality of training, which wouldn't matter if we were just looking to do a job for a paycheck. One could even argue that top academic medical centers could get away with making us pay them to let us work there in some cases. You're not paid more because you're work is more valuable. I'm not sure if that's what you implied, but you should certainly understand that. If resident pay did not involve these other non-monetary factors, and there were more competition between hospitals for residents, pay would certainly go up.
