On the topic of calling NPs 'doctor'

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

student NP

student NP
10+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
There seems to be many mixed reactions to NPs using the title 'doctor.' I agree that perhaps there needs to be some discression to the application of another title to an already appropriately labeled professional role. The doctorate degree has its benefits and purpose, however, the greater determing factor in an NPs' longevity lies in their experience as an RN previous to obtaining script and diagnositic privilages.

Many professionals who hold doctorate degrees do not use the title of 'doctor' and it does not influence their image as their already existing position speaks for itself. Physicians and pharmacists, however, sometimes loose sight of the extent of an RN's education prior to graduate work. RNs in the United States are taught assessment skills reserved for physicians in third world countries due to the influence technology and research has had on the practice of medicine.

NPs have existed since the 1960's and the BSN has gained recognition as the professional level of RN practice with the ADN as the technical level of RN practice by many schools and hospitals. Having the DNP recognized as the 'polished' level of NP practice will make little difference in some circles. The significance of the role of the NP will be forever appreciated by general practitioners who learn to work along side the NP. :)

Members don't see this ad.
 
There seems to be many mixed reactions to NPs using the title 'doctor.' I agree that perhaps there needs to be some discression to the application of another title to an already appropriately labeled professional role. The doctorate degree has its benefits and purpose, however, the greater determing factor in an NPs' longevity lies in their experience as an RN previous to obtaining script and diagnositic privilages.

Many professionals who hold doctorate degrees do not use the title of 'doctor' and it does not influence their image as their already existing position speaks for itself. Physicians and pharmacists, however, sometimes loose sight of the extent of an RN's education prior to graduate work. RNs in the United States are taught assessment skills reserved for physicians in third world countries due to the influence technology and research has had on the practice of medicine.

NPs have existed since the 1960's and the BSN has gained recognition as the professional level of RN practice with the ADN as the technical level of RN practice by many schools and hospitals. Having the DNP recognized as the 'polished' level of NP practice will make little difference in some circles. The significance of the role of the NP will be forever appreciated by general practitioners who learn to work along side the NP. :)

Two things.

1) Are you a resident or an NP student?......

2)What's you actual stance on NP's being called doctor? Should they or should they not allow it? I only ask because it'll be the main focus of the thread, but I also understand your point
 
Why worry about the title?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
the greater determing factor in an NPs' longevity lies in their experience as an RN previous to obtaining script and diagnositic privilages.

Not following here. What does previous RN experience and NP "longevity" have to do with one another.

Many professionals who hold doctorate degrees do not use the title of 'doctor' and it does not influence their image as their already existing position speaks for itself.

And many within the medical field hold doctorate degrees and DO use the title "doctor," such as dentists, optometrists and clinical psychologists.

I don't care one way or the other. I've argued on behalf of DNP using the title doctor in other threads, but mostly because the arguments against it are logically flawed and historically indefensible. The only logical way to argue against DNP "doctors" is to say that in the clinical setting, only MD's and DO's can use the title - period. But that's a moot point - by allowing dentists, optometrists, clinical psychologists, etc. to call themselves "doctor," Pandora's box has already been opened.
 
And many within the medical field hold doctorate degrees and DO use the title "doctor," such as dentists, optometrists and clinical psychologists.

I don't care one way or the other. I've argued on behalf of DNP using the title doctor in other threads, but mostly because the arguments against it are logically flawed and historically indefensible. The only logical way to argue against DNP "doctors" is to say that in the clinical setting, only MD's and DO's can use the title - period. But that's a moot point - by allowing dentists, optometrists, clinical psychologists, etc. to call themselves "doctor," Pandora's box has already been opened.

Dental school: 4 years
Optometry school: 4 years
Clinical psychology school: 5 years
DNP school: How many years again?

Huh?
 
Dental school: 4 years
Optometry school: 4 years
Clinical psychology school: 5 years
DNP school: How many years again?

Huh?

BSN+DNP approx 4-6 yrs. But that's not relevant unless you are actually arguing that length of schooling entitles you to the title doctor. In that case, pharmacists would be called "doctor" - do you support that?

At any rate, my point is the cat is out of the bag by virtue of the fact that there are already non-medical school graduates in clinical settings using the title doctor.
 
BSN+DNP approx 4-6 yrs. But that's not relevant unless you are actually arguing that length of schooling entitles you to the title doctor. In that case, pharmacists would be called "doctor" - do you support that?

At any rate, my point is the cat is out of the bag by virtue of the fact that there are already non-medical school graduates in clinical settings using the title doctor.

You do realize that all those other degrees also require bachelor's degrees, don't you?

In their appropriate settings, pharmacists, psychologists, optometrists, dentists, scientists, archeologists, English literarians, etc. can use the term doctor. The whole issue is that NP's want to use the term doctor in clinical settings in which doctor implies a physician.
 
Why worry about the title?

Who are you talking to?


I think AndEE made a funny point in regards to the fact every other facet (medicine, optometry etc) requires a bachelors.
 
You do realize that all those other degrees also require bachelor's degrees, don't you?

Uh, yes. But they don't require a specific, professional licensure degree, such as the BSN. You cannot exclude the BSN from the DNP as part of the training time. I can be a BA in english lit and go to optometry school. Not so with the DNP. Regardless, the amount of time to earn a degree is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

In their appropriate settings, pharmacists, psychologists, optometrists, dentists, scientists, archeologists, English literarians, etc. can use the term doctor. The whole issue is that NP's want to use the term doctor in clinical settings in which doctor implies a physician.

You are digging a hole for yourself and don't even realize it.

Optometrists work along side opthamologists in the same clinics and call themselves doctors. Psychologists work along side psychiatrists in the same clinics and call themselves doctors. Dentists who work with MD's call themselves doctors. DPM's working in clinical settings call themselves doctors. The optometrist, psychologist, dentists and DPM's are not physicians (MD, DO), yet call themselves doctor when working in clinical settings with physicians. Does that bother you?

BTW, you say that PharmD's can call themselves doctor in "appropriate settings." What are those appropriate settings, exactly?
 
Last edited:
Uh, yes. But they don't require a specific, professional licensure degree, such as the BSN. You cannot exclude the BSN from the DNP as part of the training time. I can be a BA in english lit and go to optometry school. Not so with the DNP. Regardless, the amount of time to earn a degree is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

Yes a BSN is required for the NP, but how is it clinically relevant besides exposure to the clinical setting and nursing theorem? BSN has no inclusion of curriculum teaching you how to diagnose. It's not really the BSN itself that provides useful clinical experience, more like the ADN.

The fundamental question is....are Nurse Practitioners Nurses or Doctors?
 
Yes a BSN is required for the NP, but how is it clinically relevant besides exposure to the clinical setting and nursing theorem? BSN has no inclusion of curriculum teaching you how to diagnose. It's not really the BSN itself that provides useful clinical experience, more like the ADN.

You missed the point, FC. The question was how long does it take to get the DNP. I included the BSN because it is required for the DNP. However, as I've stated twice now, the length of time to get a specific degree isn't relevant to the discussion at hand. The utility of the DNP is another discussion.

The fact that the BSN doesn't teach you to diagnose is also irrelevant. That's like saying gross anatomy and biochem in med school is pointless because they don't teach you how to diagnose.
 
Last edited:
The fact that the BSN doesn't teach you to diagnose is also irrelevant. That's like saying gross anatomy and biochem in med school is pointless because they don't teach you how to diagnose.

The way I see it, the two latter classes you mentioned for med school have very much to do with ones capabilities to diagnose/become a doctor especially since it MS curriculum.

With an ADN/BSN whatever it may be those two degrees prepare you to be a clinical nurse/management & leadership, so again are nurse practitioners nurses or doctors? The debate is DNP but in reality a Master's Nurse Practicioner functions identically to a DNP, with the exception that additional curriculum for a DNP almost mirrors an MBA.

An the length of time for a DNP isn't the issue I agree, it's the very low clinical hours (no you can not count BSN etc as clinical hours for nurse practicioner, even if you did it's still very low in comparison to MD/DO and even PA) and it's a little unsettling to many the whole distance education thing.

How can you not even acknowledge that this is a real issue? Consider the fact that legislation has been passed in 7 (if not more now) where it is illegal for DNPs and other doctorally prepared health professional from using the title "Doctor".
 
The way I see it, the two latter classes you mentioned for med school have very much to do with ones capabilities to diagnose/become a doctor especially since it MS curriculum.

OK, FC, I'll bite a little, but we are off-topic. BSN nurses take classes in pharmacology/pharmacokinetics/pharmacotherapeutics, pathophysiology, health/physical assessment, medical-surgical nursing, critical care nursing, obstetric nursing, pediatric nursing, geriatric nursing, psychiatric nursing, public health nursing/epidemiology. In each of the courses I just described ending in "nursing," relevant anatomy/physiology, pathophysiology, medical/surgical treatments, and pharmacology are integrated heavily into the curriculum. Each also have a corresponding clinical rotation requirement in each of the specified areas.

Are you still willing to say that none of what I just described is relevant to the NP diagnosing and prescribing (and thus not relevant for inclusion in the amount of time it takes to get a DNP)?

As an aside, what I described above is also why it is ridiculous to compare graduate NP curriculum to a PA masters, as what I described above gets excluded in such discussions.


With an ADN/BSN whatever it may be those two degrees prepare you to be a clinical nurse/management & leadership, so again are nurse practitioners nurses or doctors? The debate is DNP but in reality a Master's Nurse Practicioner functions identically to a DNP, with the exception that additional curriculum for a DNP almost mirrors an MBA.

Dude, I know you are new to all of this, but try to keep up. You ask, "are nurse practitioners nurses or doctors?" The whole debate is over the word, "doctor" NOT "physician" and you are confusing the two in your head. Nor am I saying a DNP is clinically superior to the MS prepared NP. Please keep on topic if you want further responses from me.

How can you not even acknowledge that this is a real issue? Consider the fact that legislation has been passed in 7 (if not more now) where it is illegal for DNPs and other doctorally prepared health professional from using the title "Doctor".

If I didn't think it was in issue, I wouldn't be posting in this thread.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
No one really gives a flying f... what the degree is called and what the correct title of the degree is. Except the people who have it and want to use it to pretend they are something more.

In a medical setting: They aren't doctors. Thus, I feel referring to it is deceitful and wrong. But of course (roll eyes)... It's right, because the degree gave them the title.



I feel bad for all the MDs right now, they are getting SO screwed from a million different things right now. Thank God dentistry hasn't gone down the same road yet.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I would say that the issue is that in a clinical setting the word 'doctor' is synonymous with physician. The difference with an dentist, optometrist, or Psy.D, is that they spent years focusing on a specific area of healthcare and operate only in that setting. I can see how it might raise issues in a broad-based clinical setting when a non MD/DO introduces themselves as doctor.

I have several friends in medical school who have PhDs, for example, and it would be inappropriate for them to introduce themselves as 'doctor xyz' to patients. (Although it is fun to joke about outside of the hospital).

If DNPs want to change this tradition in addition to lobbying for greater independent prescribing rights, I have no problem with it.. as long as states remove the physician accountability by extension for nursing malpractice (if the DNP is practicing with a physician). If I were an attending, my biggest worry about this would be to have an independently practicing DNP on my team, but be inheriting all the legal risk myself.

And yes, MDs do get it from all sides. I remember as an EMT how there would be a collective snickering by the EMTs, paramedics, and nurses about doctors and their poor management of patients. I didn't understand it then, and I understand it even less now as a 4th year. C'est la vie.
 
Funny - the only ones squawking about the "right" to be called "doctor" are the nurse practitioners. Pretty much nobody else thinks they should be called that - just them.

"...appreciated by general practitioners who learn to work along side the NP..." Are you serious? Really? How about NP's who learn to work alongside general practitioners?


And to "studentNP" - you are a student, not a resident. Also, try and learn some spelling while you're in your "doctorate" program. "...discression...diagnositic...privilages"
 
If DNPs want to change this tradition in addition to lobbying for greater independent prescribing rights, I have no problem with it

Just to be clear, I do not support NP independent practice - they simply don't have the training. Entirely different discussion.
 
Last edited:
Funny - the only ones squawking about the "right" to be called "doctor" are the nurse practitioners. Pretty much nobody else thinks they should be called that - just them.

Wrong. That's the point. Podiatrists, dentists, optometrists, clinical psychologists, etc. all think they should be called doctor. The squawking is coming from some of the physicians, med students and pre-meds on this board about DNP's being called doctor.

Where and when have you challenged the above professions for using the word "doctor." Why are you only challenging NP's? Have you posted like this over in the optometry forum? The psychology forum?
 
Wrong. That's the point. Podiatrists, dentists, optometrists, clinical psychologists, etc. all think they should be called doctor. The squawking is coming from some of the physicians, med students and pre-meds on this board about DNP's being called doctor.

Where and when have you challenged the above professions for using the word "doctor." Why are you only challenging NP's? Have you posted like this over in the optometry forum? The psychology forum?

The difference is that those other professions have almost always been referred to as "doctor". It's only the nurses who are making the new move and squealing about it. PharmD, AuD, DPT, etc., seem not to care about it.
 
The difference is that those other professions have almost always been referred to as "doctor". It's only the nurses who are making the new move and squealing about it. PharmD, AuD, DPT, etc., seem not to care about it.

So, then, with you, it's not about "confusing the patient," its about doing things they way they have always been done because they have always been done that way. Got it. :)
 
I don't really have an opinion on the other disciplines we keep referring to (optometry, pharmacy etc), I don't have an issue if a DNP introduces themselves "Hi i'm Dr. Smith," as long as the latter part of sentence contains " and I will be your Nurse Practicioner/and I am a Nurse Practitioner". An that's fine, but I think it makes one look rather pretentious.

The truth is the majority of the general public (nonhealthcare related folks) are not capable of deducing that you aren't actually a physician.
 
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XViCOAu6UC0&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmj6WtkJg8A[/YOUTUBE]


hahahaha just for the :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I don't have an issue if a DNP introduces themselves "Hi i'm Dr. Smith," as long as the latter part of sentence contains " and I will be your Nurse Practicioner/and I am a Nurse Practitioner". An that's fine, but I think it makes one look rather pretentious.

Fair enough. I have zero desire to get a DNP, but if I'm ever compelled to for some reason (e.g. forced at gun point), I'll never introduce my self as doctor. Just doesn't matter to me (one way or the other).

The truth is the majority of the general public (nonhealthcare related folks) are not capable of deducing that you aren't actually a physician.

Perhaps, but the majority of the general public has no clue the radical difference between an intern vs. resident vs. attending, optometrist vs. opthamologist, or a clinical psychologist vs. a psychiatrist, yet they all can/do walk in and say, "Hi Mrs. Smith, I'm Dr. So and So." Yet I've heard no one complain about patient confusion in these cases.
 
Last edited:
I have nothing worthwhile to add specifically to the DNP topic, but I can comment on the Dr. title in some of the "other professions."

I have a PhD. Being referred to as "Dr. Rouelle" got old about 30 minutes after my dissertation defense. The only times I have introduced myself with the Dr title have been when I was teaching classes in a department that essentially required students to address the instructors formally. Outside the class, I was always very happy being referred to simply as "Rouelle." I am currently in pharmacy school working towards a PharmD. The ONLY pharmacists I have ever heard introduce themselves as "Dr" are pharmacy professors in a classroom setting. Perhaps I live in a sheltered area, but from what little I've seen, it isn't very common for many non-physicians holding a doctoral degree to use the title.
 
most pharmacists don't care about being called doctor outside of academia. there are a few who do but those people are usually students. in a hospital setting, pharmacists will typically introduce themselves as such. no need to confuse the patient. as for interacting with colleagues, at our hospital they are all call each other by their first name unless in front of a patient. why are so many nursing students obsessed with the doctor thing?
 
Just to be clear, I do not support NP independent practice - they simply don't have the training. Entirely different discussion.

I just can not believe I don't have your support. :D
 
I don't mind calling a dentist a "doctor" while in his dentists office. I don't mind calling an optometrist a "doctor" while in her optometry office. I don't mind calling the pharmacist "doctor" while I'm in the pharmacy. I don't mind calling the chemist "doctor" while in his lab. And I don't mind calling the DNP "doctor" while in the classroom. The same way I don't mind calling a janitor who has a PhD in music "Doctor" in the hallway.

But if any of those folks introduce themselves to a patient in a medical setting (hospital, medical clinic, etc) in front of me then I will quickly set them straight by correctly introducing them as a dentist, optometrist, pharmacist, chemist, nurse, or musician.

And for those wayward folks who DEMAND to be called Doctor (in front of patients) because they have EARNED their advanced degree, I will simply say "I will call you Doctor when you call me Master.":laugh:
 
There are a few issues with the whole DNP being called doctor thing:

1) The title doctor should be given to the people who are the expert of their field. For instance, a dentist is the expert in the mouth. A pharmacist is an expert in the field of pharmacodynamics/kinetics. An MD/DO is an expert in the internal workings of the body. A DNP tries to do the same job as an MD however they have a fraction of the training. Therefore they are not the expert in the field and do not deserve to be called doctor.

To expand upon this, an optometrist in a clinical setting with a ophthalmologist probably shouldn't be called doctor either.

2) The DNP is not an improvement in the clinical education compared to the masters. The added classes are MPH classes and a capstone project, not clinical ones. They take vastly more credit hours on healthcare leadership and research than pharm or path. When you look at the courses, it should not be a doctorate at all.

3) Many claim similar education between DNP and MD however there are almost four times as many basic science credit hours and between 17 and 34 times as many clinical hours in training. The assertion that a nurse has previous clinical exposure that makes up for this is a logical fallacy. They were following orders, for the most part, not making clinical decisions and not being the leader of the team. Nursing diagnosis is definitely not the same thing as medical diagnosis.


So to summarize
1) The title doctor should only be for experts in the field. Noctoring is not fundamentally different from being a medical doctor.
2) DNP is not an improvement upon the masters. It shouldn't be a doctorate at all.
3) There is a vast chasm between what a true doctor learns and what a DNP does
 
The DNP programs were developed due to support the shortage of Primary Care Physicians within the US. NP's assess, diagnose, treat and refer, all with a "collaborating" Physician. (This is an area where PA's and NP's differ- PA's require an on-site Physician). Many other professions are now requiring Doctoral degrees such as Physical Therapists (DPT), and Pharmacists (RPh). NP's do not wish to be called "Doctor". This is usually seen in the academic arena. They are fully aware that they are mid-level practioners, and they are an essential part of the healthcare team. They are simply making the profession more respectable. Many hospitals are now requiring and/or preferring RN's to hold a Bachelor's degree. It only makes sense that the NP degree be advanced. I think many are taking this the wrong way.
:idea:
 
The DNP programs were developed due to support the shortage of Primary Care Physicians within the US. NP's assess, diagnose, treat and refer, all with a "collaborating" Physician. (This is an area where PA's and NP's differ- PA's require an on-site Physician). Many other professions are now requiring Doctoral degrees such as Physical Therapists (DPT), and Pharmacists (RPh). NP's do not wish to be called "Doctor". This is usually seen in the academic arena. They are fully aware that they are mid-level practioners, and they are an essential part of the healthcare team. They are simply making the profession more respectable. Many hospitals are now requiring and/or preferring RN's to hold a Bachelor's degree. It only makes sense that the NP degree be advanced. I think many are taking this the wrong way.
:idea:


You are wrong on every single account.

The DNP was not created to help with the shortage of primary care. The NP profession already exists. It is even a fallacy to say the NP was created to help with this shortage because, if you look at the history, the first NP program was created in Colorado in direct response to Dr. Stead's creation of the PA program at Duke. Remember, Dr. Stead wanted to use experienced nurses as PAs first, but the nursing organizations refused to let him so he went with military medics. Then the nursing organizations realized they missed the boat so they created the NP).

While most DNPs don't demand to be called "Doctor" in the clinical setting (yet!), there is the vocal minority that is pushing the issue.

PA's do NOT require "on-site physician supervision". In any state. Period.

In many states, NP's have successfully lobbied for legislative changes removing any requirement for physician oversight. This is just scary.

Lastly....if the RN should be BS level, then the NP can still be the "advanced degree" by having a masters.
 
Last edited:
The DNP programs were developed due to support the shortage of Primary Care Physicians within the US...


I know nothing about the history of NPs.
But, if the DNP was developed to support the shortage of PCPs (as you assert), what does that say about how the Ivory Tower Nurses viewed the Master's NP prior to the DNP?

It says to me that someone in nursing either didn't think much of the (then current) NP role, OR that having a doctorate in nursing, made the advance practice RN sound more like a physician.

I mean, why mess with something if it was 'working'

The NPs and PAs were (presumably) already filling in gaps left by PCPs (rural areas for example)
(how safe this has been is up for debate)

The fact that the number of DNP programs has quadrupled in the last ten years makes me think that the DNP is more about $$$$ and rolling out ill prepared advanced practice RNs, than it is about 'filling in gaps'
 
I know nothing about the history of NPs.
But, if the DNP was developed to support the shortage of PCPs (as you assert), what does that say about how the Ivory Tower Nurses viewed the Master's NP prior to the DNP?

It says to me that someone in nursing either didn't think much of the (then current) NP role, OR that having a doctorate in nursing, made the advance practice RN sound more like a physician.

I mean, why mess with something if it was 'working'

The NPs and PAs were (presumably) already filling in gaps left by PCPs (rural areas for example)
(how safe this has been is up for debate)

The fact that the number of DNP programs has quadrupled in the last ten years makes me think that the DNP is more about $$$$ and rolling out ill prepared advanced practice RNs, than it is about 'filling in gaps'

Ah, a common sense post filled with logic - how refreshing.
 
The DNP programs were developed due to support the shortage of Primary Care Physicians within the US. NP's assess, diagnose, treat and refer, all with a "collaborating" Physician. (This is an area where PA's and NP's differ- PA's require an on-site Physician). Many other professions are now requiring Doctoral degrees such as Physical Therapists (DPT), and Pharmacists (RPh). NP's do not wish to be called "Doctor". This is usually seen in the academic arena. They are fully aware that they are mid-level practioners, and they are an essential part of the healthcare team. They are simply making the profession more respectable. Many hospitals are now requiring and/or preferring RN's to hold a Bachelor's degree. It only makes sense that the NP degree be advanced. I think many are taking this the wrong way.
:idea:

Facts are your friend - you should try learning some.

DNP programs were NOT developed to deal with a shortage of primary care physicians.

What irritates many people, including a lot of PA's and myself, is that the DNP is really such a BS misnomer. Doctorate of Nursing PRACTICE. As long as you define nursing PRACTICE as politics, "advanced" nursing theory, and social policy, I guess it would be correct. But it has nothing to do with CLINICAL practice. You would think there would be some advanced courses in physiology, pharmacology, physical examination, or SOMETHING that is clinically related. In most cases, they simply aren't there. What's the point, except to load enough hours into a curriculum and call it a doctorate and then try to pass yourself off as a "doctor"? That's really all it is.
 
The fact that the number of DNP programs has quadrupled in the last ten years makes me think that the DNP is more about $$$$ and rolling out ill prepared advanced practice RNs, than it is about 'filling in gaps'
:thumbup:
 
Dental school: 4 years
Optometry school: 4 years
Clinical psychology school: 5 years
DNP school: How many years again?

Huh?


The average clinical psychologist in a Ph.D. program takes more like 6 or 7 years on average to complete the Ph.D. This is because the Ph.D. in clinical psychology is a weird hybrid of training to be a doctoral level professional AND as an academician or scholar. Psy.D. programs take less time. Typically a Ph..D. student in clinical psychology will have 4-5 years of classes equaling about 120-ish credit hours and clinical training experiences akin to clerkships. This is followed by a year of internship. But we also have huge research project commitments, publications, teaching and research assistantship positions and the long drawn out bloody dissertation Then once you get the Ph.D. you have *another* full year of post-doctoral training before you can get a license. All told its thousands and thousands of hours outside the classroom in clinical and research training. Looking at these truncated DNP programs, they don't resemble anything that I would even remotely call a doctorate. It can't even begin to equal the training of a Ph.D. in clinical psychology. At best they look more like "specialist" degrees that lie between the M.S and Ph.D. I'm surprised that the regional accrediting agencies like WASC or SACS let the universities get away with this. I strongly support the profession of nursing and NP's gaining more autonomy. But if they want to be doctoral level professionals, the academic curriculum and clinical training requirements need to be upgraded to levels similar to those of other doctoral level professions.
 
Last edited:
Facts are your friend - you should try learning some.

DNP programs were NOT developed to deal with a shortage of primary care physicians.

What irritates many people, including a lot of PA's and myself, is that the DNP is really such a BS misnomer. Doctorate of Nursing PRACTICE. As long as you define nursing PRACTICE as politics, "advanced" nursing theory, and social policy, I guess it would be correct. But it has nothing to do with CLINICAL practice. You would think there would be some advanced courses in physiology, pharmacology, physical examination, or SOMETHING that is clinically related. In most cases, they simply aren't there. What's the point, except to load enough hours into a curriculum and call it a doctorate and then try to pass yourself off as a "doctor"? That's really all it is.

Do some of these NPs actually INSIST on being addressed as " doctor " ?

Why?

The only outcome of this (I can see) is confusing the patient, and annoying the crap out of the housestaff and attendings.

You
are
a
NURSE.

It would take some pretty big balls to actually insist / tell people to call you "doctor".
 
Do some of these NPs actually INSIST on being addressed as " doctor " ?

Why?

The only outcome of this (I can see) is confusing the patient, and annoying the crap out of the housestaff and attendings.

You
are
a
NURSE.

It would take some pretty big balls to actually insist / tell people to call you "doctor".

Haha its really low class to insist that people call you doctor.
Can't even imagine how bad the DNPs are in a social setting ?
 
Haha its really low class to insist that people call you doctor.
Can't even imagine how bad the DNPs are in a social setting ?

I'll bet they even check the little "Dr" box on credit apps, online forms, etc., instead of Mr. or Mrs.
 
The only outcome of this (I can see) is confusing the patient, and annoying the crap out of the housestaff and attendings.

You are a NURSE..

I've all but given up on someone actually answering my question, but I'll try one last time. :)

Why is it OK for the optometrist working along side the opthamologist, or the clinical psychologist working along side the psychiatrist to be called "doctor," but not the DNP working alongside an MD?
 
I've all but given up on someone actually answering my question, but I'll try one last time. :)

Why is it OK for the optometrist working along side the opthamologist, or the clinical psychologist working along side the psychiatrist to be called "doctor," but not the DNP working alongside an MD?
I guess the best explanation you're going to get is that those are highly trained professionals who process a clinical doctorate degree, versus the DNP which is a BS 1 year administrative "doctorate" that adds nothing of substance to the holder.
 
I guess the best explanation you're going to get is that those are highly trained professionals who process a clinical doctorate degree, versus the DNP which is a BS 1 year administrative "doctorate" that adds nothing of substance to the holder.

Additionally, those other doctoral level professions aren't provide interventions that could easily be confused with similar duties of a physician. If a person walks into an examination room and introduces themselves as Dr. Smith, and then proceeds to do a physical examination, check vitals, etc....that would be confusing, no? An optometrist isn't going to exam your wound, and a pharmacist isn't going to check your reflexes.

Even with clearly delineated functions as a neuropsychologist, I still introduce myself as, "Dr. T4C, I'm your neuropsychologist. I'm here to evaluate....etc" I rather enjoy my job and don't want to be confused with being a medical person, lest I be asked to examine a pus-filled sore or palpate an odd looking growth. No thank you...I'll leave all of that fun examination to the medical folks. :laugh:
 
Why is it OK for the optometrist working along side the opthamologist, or the clinical psychologist working along side the psychiatrist to be called "doctor," but not the DNP working alongside an MD?

What are you trying to suggest, that two wrongs make a right?

The public is plenty confused about the differences between an optometrist and an ophthalmologist, and a psychologist and a psychiatrist. Don't kid yourself.
 
I guess the best explanation you're going to get is that those are highly trained professionals who process a clinical doctorate degree, versus the DNP which is a BS 1 year administrative "doctorate" that adds nothing of substance to the holder.

Only if you are talking about a post-masters DNP. For a BSN, it is 3-4 years and includes all of the clinical training encompassed in the MSN.
 
Additionally, those other doctoral level professions aren't provide interventions that could easily be confused with similar duties of a physician.

Are you saying the public isn't confused about the work of an optometrist vs. opthamologist and a psychologist vs. a psychiatrist?

Even with clearly delineated functions as a neuropsychologist,

Clearly delineated to you, but not the public. The general public does not know the difference between a neuropsychologist vs. a neuropsychiatrist.

I still introduce myself as, "Dr. T4C, I'm your neuropsychologist. I'm here to evaluate....etc"

So you are OK with DNP using "doctor" as long as that is followed by, "...a nurse practitioner?"
 
What are you trying to suggest, that two wrongs make a right?

No, but two lefts do.


The public is plenty confused about the differences between an optometrist and an ophthalmologist, and a psychologist and a psychiatrist. Don't kid yourself.

No, I agree with you. That's, in part, my point. The argument is that DNP using the title doctor is confusing. Yet optometrists, etc. using the title is confusing too. So, one cannot argue that DNP's cannot use the title doctor without also arguing that clinical psychologists, optometrists, etc. cannot use the title. If that is your stance, then at least you are being logically consistent. However, I don't see the "outrage" on this board about these other professions using the title - just NP's.

As an aside, I know a nurse with the last name Doctor. Now THAT would be confusing. "Hello, I am nurse Doctor," or "Hello, I'm Dr. Doctor, your nurse..." :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top