Pathologist retirement age

[Tissue issue]

---

Members do not see this ad.

How many pathologists are voluntarily retiring before age 65? Anybody know anyone like this?? I'm talking fully and truly retired- not part-time, locums, changed mind and came back out of retirement, etc.

 

[pathstudent]

how many pathologists are voluntarily retiring before age 65? .

3491

I do know one. She was married to a neurosurgeon and retired as soon as he finished residency. So she was only about 31 when she retired.

 

[Napoleon1801]

Not many that I know of. Could probably count the number on one hand....

 

[scienceguy19]

they are known to never retire...Not many... they usually have DNR orders "Do Not Retire' even when they're debilitated and near death. 🙂

Not many that I know of. Could probably count the number on one hand....

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

I've heard a fair number talk about early retirement due to accession numbers being down so much. NO WAY will I be working in pathology past 50.🙂

 

[path24]

My guess the average would be in the low 70s. They start to get pressured into retirement around that age, so they may be done in their late 70s. I know of only one pathologist that retired before 65.

 

[Pingu]

I've seen quite a few working into their 70s. Pathology is not very physically demanding, so you can totter into the office, sign out for a few hours, and still collect a good paycheck.

Who in their right mind would leave that situation?

 

[path or no path]

they are known to never retire...Not many... they usually have DNR orders "Do Not Retire' even when they're debilitated and near death. 🙂

 

[lipomas]

I don't know really of any physicians who retire unless they are physically or mentally incapable of practicing. Unless they get rich on something non-practice related like designing a medical device or being bought out. We have surgeons at our hospital in their 70s. A couple are 80. We have also had pathologists retire before 65. It's pretty obvious that pathologists have fewer physical limitations to deal with and they can practice longer than the average clinician but for each individual you can't generalize.

 

[Torsed]

The two recent ones I know of were 69 and 85. Oh and a chairman of a department that went at 90. 🙂

 

[member0007]

It would be nice if these folks would retire and utilize the social system of medicare while it's still up and running, but only if they are of age.

 

[pathstudent]

It would be nice if these folks would retire and utilize the social system of medicare while it's still up and running, but only if they are of age.

. Even if you are working at 65, 70, 80 you still have to collect social security and utilize Medicare.

 

[lipomas]

. Even if you are working at 65, 70, 80 you still have to collect social security and utilize Medicare.

You don't have to do anything. I have never really met anyone who declined social security, although I'm sure they exist. Even Ron Paul takes the money.

 

[dermpathdoc]

How many pathologists are voluntarily retiring before age 65? Anybody know anyone like this?? I'm talking fully and truly retired- not part-time, locums, changed mind and came back out of retirement, etc.

At the Association of Pathology Chairs meeting this last week it was mentioned that that average age of pathologists in practice is now 58 yrs. That age is expected to increase over the next 5 years to 62. the reason according to the survey reported is that fewer students are going into Pathology. Apparently the report will be published in a couple of months with the full interpretation.

 

[pathstudent]

At the Association of Pathology Chairs meeting this last week it was mentioned that that average age of pathologists in practice is now 58 yrs. That age is expected to increase over the next 5 years to 62. the reason according to the survey reported is that fewer students are going into Pathology. Apparently the report will be published in a couple of months with the full interpretation.

Whoever drew that inclusion is a flat out *****. Look at nrmp data. More pathologists are being minted each year compared to ten or twenty years ago. Over the last five years the overall number of resident spots has remained about the same and filled to about the 90% mark. So how could it be that from 2008 to 2012 there has been a record number of pathologists entering residency and we will see a 4 year increase in average pathologist age when those residents all have entered the job market by 2017? That is completely illogical.

So in five years the average age of pathologists will increase four years. The only way that would be possible is if the average age of your first year resident over the last five years is 50 and almost no working pathologists retire between now and then. This reeks of *****icism. Make sure you publish a link to the report

Amigo, don't believe anything you hear and only half what you read.

 

[2121115]

at the association of pathology chairs meeting this last week it was mentioned that that average age of pathologists in practice is now 58 yrs. That age is expected to increase over the next 5 years to 62. The reason according to the survey reported is that fewer students are going into pathology. Apparently the report will be published in a couple of months with the full interpretation.

lol!

🙂

 

[Substance]

At the Association of Pathology Chairs meeting this last week it was mentioned that that average age of pathologists in practice is now 58 yrs. That age is expected to increase over the next 5 years to 62. the reason according to the survey reported is that fewer students are going into Pathology. Apparently the report will be published in a couple of months with the full interpretation.

If the APC looks at only the %AMGs matched to path vs the number of spots, they're correct.

What they are failing to address is the %FMG matching to path vs the number of spots. If this is taken into account, the pathology professional environment is overbloated.

Did anyone at this meeting realize this and call them out on it, or are pathologists living up to their meek servile stereotypes?

Radiology is starting to have similar issues. They'd be wise to cut the FMG tracks immediately to prevent the same thing happening to them.

 

[pathstudent]

That's awesome that the average age of pathologists will be close to the historical retirement age. Too funny. Since there are 31 year old pathologists on the young end of the spectrum, there must be 93 year old pathologist to mean them out. EIther that or there has to be two 76 year old pathologists for every 31 year old one.

There is something impossible about those numbers.

 

[scienceguy19]

yet another example of misleading statistics... they should know better.

They should look at the number of people graduating from pathology residency, not the fewer number of american medical graduates going into pathology...

That's awesome that the average age of pathologists will be close to the historical retirement age. Too funny. Since there are 31 year old pathologists on the young end of the spectrum, there must be 93 year old pathologist to mean them out. EIther that or there has to be two 76 year old pathologists for every 31 year old one.

There is something impossible about those numbers.

 

[LADoc00]

How many pathologists are voluntarily retiring before age 65? Anybody know anyone like this?? I'm talking fully and truly retired- not part-time, locums, changed mind and came back out of retirement, etc.

It happens, but its rare.

God bless them when they do voluntarily leave before they are demented.

I have seen some crazy stuff, Pathologist attempting to "direct" labs with severe Az Dementia etc. well into their 70-80s

The youngest Pathologist I have heard of retiring/going part time was a guy down on the coast in California. Think he was in his late 30s, owned his house, no family, dating "young" ladies/co-eds etc. aka "Living the Dream"!

he was an absolute anomaly though.

 

[Silent Cool]

If the APC looks at only the %AMGs matched to path vs the number of spots, they're correct.

What they are failing to address is the %FMG matching to path vs the number of spots. If this is taken into account, the pathology professional environment is overbloated.

Did anyone at this meeting realize this and call them out on it, or are pathologists living up to their meek servile stereotypes?

Radiology is starting to have similar issues. They'd be wise to cut the FMG tracks immediately to prevent the same thing happening to them.

Substance,

Do you see Radiology becoming the next Pathology in terms of saturation? There was a huge increase in rads spots around 1999 and now that increase is seriously beginning to affect the workforce. Lots of people doing two fellowships, starting income way down, etc...Plus the accelerated pathway for FMGs. Seems like it will be similar to Path in 10 years.

😎