This is what I posted in the osteopathic forum, so I guess I'll post it again. Boy this just goes on and on don't it...
Clearly both sides are very passionate about their stance. However, in your experience, has anyone ever been swayed to your beliefs by personal attacks? No. So that's clearly not going to work, on either side, is it?
From what I gather the pro changers are basically saying changing from DO to MD, DO will:
1) allow US DO's to practice overseas (differentiating US DOs from foreign DO's, who have a very limited scope of practice.
2) gain recognition within the US for those who aren't aware that a DO is BASICALLY equivalent to an MD, with all the same practice rights.
3) gain awareness of what differentiates a DO from an MD. MD, DO equals an MD + OMM basically.
4) end the seeming discrimination against DOs by giving DOs the well earned prestige of the MD moniker.
5) times have changed from when DOs first started. They used to be different from MDs, but they are basically the same now. We should change our degree to reflect that.
The anti changers seem to be saying leave DOs as DOs because:
1) DOs are different than their MD counterparts
2) we need to show respect for those who forged the way to get DOs full practice rights in this country.
3) the only reason to change the name is to make those who wish they had "MDs" feel better about themselves.
4) merging the two, by allowing MDs to do osteopathic residencies will decrease the residency spots we have available and make the mess we are already in, worse.
5) wasting time, energy, and money on this seemingly minor and ego-driven name change issue detracts from what is really important: fill in the blank...
6) how does changing the name help the profession with recognition? It will just add to the confusion.
7) how would having an MD in your title make you a better physician?
Feel free to add your own and comment on the above...
I personally am anti name change. Of the pro points as I've laid out, the only valid argument that I've heard is possibly for overseas rights, as that is confusing that there are foreign DOs with vastly different practice rights than US graduates. It's basically a totally different degree. But that's the only pro point I see with any validity. I think the others are actually more about ego than anything else.
I think it would be a waste of time and money. DOs will be 1/5 of all medical school students starting this fall. As more DOs enter the workforce, the recognition will continue to grow, and less of you will feel bad about not having MD in your names. There are physicians out there (as in an editorial in this month's DO mag) that say please leave the degree as is- people seek them out because of the DO designation. (there are editorials on both sides, check them out- they are well reasoned on both sides imo)
So, lets either have a civil discussion about this topic or just close this thread down. As it has been going, it is a bit embarrassing I'm afraid.
