Do you think ophthalmology and optometry can become one program?

This forum made possible through the generous support of
SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Both of you will find out that without question the most anti-optometry ophthalmologists are those that had previously gone through optometry school.
I am not sure who you are talking about here, but there are guys like Walls (MD, OD) and Skorin (DO, OD) that are very pro-optometry. So pro, in fact, they have testified on behalf of OD's in scope expansion hearings. If you are talking about MD's on this forum that claim to have gone to OD school also, all I can say is people who hide behind screen names may not always be truthful.
 
Yes KHE..........Just as much as I laughed yesterday when I saw
an Ophthalmologist that had on his shingle,

"Eye Physician and Surgeon" given your reasoning that is ridiculous as well. Joe public would get lost trying to remember that. A group of us, including some medical students chuckled when we saw that. "Why not just say Ophthalmologist?"

Optometric Physician or Eye Physician is still a hell of a lot better than

WALMART VISION CENTER
Independent Doctor of Optometry
next to the Photo Shop


Actually I probably will just put "Eye Doctor" on my shingle because that is what 95% of the public refers optometric physicians as, my optometry school refers to us as that, and most of the physicians I associate with.

Eye Doctor = Optometrist
Eye Surgeon = Ophthalmologist

KHE you and I just disagree on just about everything and that is cool! 😍 I went into my optometry program in order priority to me:

1) Diagnosis and Treatment of Ocular Disease (primary care level) with medication.
2) Pre and Post Operative management of Ocular Surgery
3) Once a couple bills get passed, minor surgical procedures (like New Mexico or Oklahoma). NOT REAL INVASIVE OCULAR SURGERY
4) Rx of contacts and spectacles
5) Education----public, possibly optometric education.

I like all of those BUT in that order. My goal is to advance medical optometry or the medical aspect of it. I want to make a difference in the growth of the field and I will do an oclular disease residency upon the completion of my Optometry Doctorate. I also am looking into a degree in ocular pathology possibly an MS my last two years in school--I need help finding this. I used to be in sales and I love challenges and advancing the optometric field is a noble one.

What is wrong with going to an eye doctor next to a commercial establishment? I've been going to them all my life (Pearl Vision & Sam's Club). Or does every doctor's office have to be in a medical strip mall? If it is convenient to the patients, then so be it.
 
Sorry for reviving this thread.

I have been wondering, since OMDs can do most of what ODs do, why the need to have them as seperate professions? Maybe have both of them complete med school and a residency, and give the choice to those who want to be surgeons to complete a surgery training?
 
They don't need to be separate, but that is how the 2 fields developed. Even if it made the most sense, it would take a lot to change those trajectories now.
 
Sorry for reviving this thread.

I have been wondering, since OMDs can do most of what ODs do, why the need to have them as seperate professions? Maybe have both of them complete med school and a residency, and give the choice to those who want to be surgeons to complete a surgery training?

"OMDs can do most of what ODs do"? I think you have it backward. (Even if you reversed it, though, you'd be wrong...)
 
I'm surprised that there is such confusion about this. Commando303 is saying an OMD can do everything an OD can, PLUS additional procedures.

On the other hand, Robin des Bois stated "OMDs can do most of what ODs do". He/she is (perhaps inadvertently) saying that an OD has a larger scope of practice than an OMD. Commando303 was merely pointing out this inaccuracy.
 
I'm surprised that there is such confusion about this. Commando303 is saying an OMD can do everything an OD can, PLUS additional procedures.

On the other hand, Robin des Bois stated "OMDs can do most of what ODs do". He/she is (perhaps inadvertently) saying that an OD has a larger scope of practice than an OMD. Commando303 was merely pointing out this inaccuracy.

😍
 
I'm surprised that there is such confusion about this. Commando303 is saying an OMD can do everything an OD can, PLUS additional procedures.

On the other hand, Robin des Bois stated "OMDs can do most of what ODs do". He/she is (perhaps inadvertently) saying that an OD has a larger scope of practice than an OMD. Commando303 was merely pointing out this inaccuracy.

I didn't mean ODs have a larger scope of practice. But for example, in Quebec, OMDs can't sell glasses. But OMDs still have a larger scope of practice, they can replace the ODs.
 
I didn't mean ODs have a larger scope of practice. But for example, in Quebec, OMDs can't sell glasses. But OMDs still have a larger scope of practice, they can replace the ODs.

I was unaware of ophthalmologists' being unable to sell eyeglasses in Quebec. In the United States, ophthalmologists are not restricted from any practice in which an optometrist may engage, irrespective of whether the former chooses actually to engage in it (e.g., contact lenses, vision therapy, low vision devices). In other words, a doctorate of optometry legally enables one to do certain things (e.g., prescribe eyeglasses, contact lenses, and pharmaceutic agents; examine the eyes), however none of these is off-limits to an ophthalmologist.
 
Last edited:
I was unaware of ophthalmologists' being unable to sell eyeglasses in Quebec. In the United States, ophthalmologists are not restricted from any practice in which an optometrist may engage, irrespective of whether the former chose actually to engage in it (e.g., contact lenses, vision therapy, low vision devices). In other words, a doctorate of optometry legally enables one to do certain things (e.g., prescribe eyeglasses, contact lenses, and pharmaceutic agents; examine the eyes), however none of these is off-limits to an ophthalmologist.

Which begs the question: why are they two distinct professions? Shouldn't they be merged? OMDs can easily replace ODs.
 
Which begs the question: why are they two distinct professions? Shouldn't they be merged? OMDs can easily replace ODs.

As was mentioned earlier, these are professions that developed separately. The educational route is different, and merging them wouldn't be a simple process. Besides, why would we? Obviously OMDs can do anything an OD can do. Does that make ODs irrelevant? ODs far outnumber OMDs in the US, and the two professions have a working relationship to deliver eye care to the public. They fill different niches. That's how things have ended up as our healthcare system has developed over decades.
 
Which begs the question: why are they two distinct professions? Shouldn't they be merged? OMDs can easily replace ODs.

Sure, that's sensible (I am not being sarcastic). However, many things make sense — achieving them is altogether different from having this realization.

Optometry and ophthalmology, despite their present similarities, developed from different pieces of history. Perhaps given the immediate situation, it feels logical to "merge" the fields, as you say. But, how would this be achieved? Even taking pride out of it (something feasible only in the playground of hypotheses), how would the pragmatic details work out: Shut down optometry schools? Have everyone with an O.D. complete an M.D. (or D.O.) curriculum?

I do favor a path for optometrists who wish to become ophthalmologists to achieve their goals without "starting from scratch." That's about as far as my imagination takes me, though, and even it is a hell of a tall order.
 
Top