I have looked on the "net" for Pod jobs and found only 2. Are there enough jobs for new grads every year? 7 schools x ~ 50 grads = at least >300 DPMs per year. Toe and efs please comment as were to look for jobs.
I'm sorry Eric, but I think that it is PATHETIC that a "doctor" would have to go to such lengths to obtain employment. I usually don't jump on the anti-podiatry bandwagon but how essential is a doctor if they have to CONVINCE a hospital that they are a valuable resource?Originally posted by efs
I have heard of a couple of people that put together some pretty convincing material, and presented it to a hospital. The short end of it was that they convinced the hospital administrators that adding them would be profitable. In essence they created their own hospital based jobs.
This profession is wide open, you can do what you want to, but it may require some work on your part. Don't expect anyone to hand you anything, but force your way into what you think will work.
Not thought to be needed is only by some, apparently you are among those.The services of DPMs are not needed currently (or not thought to be needed), and if nobody needs your service you don't make an income.
I think this may be part of where we disagree. I do agree that bickering about education is non-productive. I also don't think there are any magical answers.We can bicker about education all we wish, but awareness is not going to magically turn into profit, or a greater job satisfaction among prodiatrists, or opportunities for new podiatrists.
The order in which this happens is up for debate. I do think it will happen, though it will take time, and effort.We're never going to join mainstream medicine unless we raise the standards for admission, lower the cost of attending, vastly improve the education to mirror a traditional medical education, standardize and improve the current residency system and spend a whole lot of money on lobbyists to make sure that podiatry doesn't fade away into the night. Do you think this is going to happen? I don't.
Do you really think this is true?They learn EVERYTHING!
Perhaps that ophthamologist is over-educated for the work he performs?How is it any different for, say, an ophthamologist who is going to do a corneal transplant vs. a podiatrist who is going to perform a below the knee amputation? Neither of them are psychiatrists, dermatologists or general surgeons, but the ophthamologist went through a lot of training that the podiatrist didn't. They're both responsible for the post-op complications. They're both responsible for the general anesthesia. They're both responsible for the post-op care. The patient can expire in both cases. Why did the ophthamologist go through a more rigorous clinical experience than the podiatrist? Why should the ophthamologist be trained more as a "physician" than the podiatrist?? The podiatrist cannot "pass the buck" because he/she is a podiatrist. They have the exact same level of responsibility as any other doctor.
Podiatry certainly started as chiropody and gradually added things. But there were some other things that were going on in medicine at the same time, that greatly affected the timing. Think about PCN and the antibiotic revolution after WWII. This factor is why there was not much "elective" surgery of ANY type prior to that. Surgery carried huge risks. Changges in anesthesia since that time has also played a role. The OA principles were not developed until later either. It is not as though MD surgeons and Orthopaedic surgeons have successfully been doing this stuff for hundreds or even thousands of years and it is only recently that DPMs caught up. In 1910 there really wasn't anyone doing elective foot surgery.I feel that podiatry started out as chiropody and gradually added things like surgery and prescription rights. Chiropody education didn't require any hospital experience or any kind of "residency". As podiatry progressed, the exposure to traditional medicine also increased, but at a very slow rate. The educational experience also increased, but, again, at a slow rate. In my opinion, the two are not meshing very well and are both inadequate. They've kind of reached a zenith and are no longer moving forward. At the very least, if we are going to be inside a hospital as an intern, the schools need to PUT us in hospitals like the med students are and at least teach us how a hospital functions and what to do with an ICU patient (for example).
I, on the other hand, do not place physicians in any sacred category. I do not believe that completing a "medical" education gives anyone any special attibutes. I don't think this gives anyone any special "rights" either. (I am a libertarian, and have spent a fair amount of time thinking about rights and ethics.) In particular, with the current atmosphere of "minority rights", "patient's rights", and the ensuing discrimination and anti-discrimination policies many things have been skewed. As part of this, many "PC" and "cultural" and "social" engineering policies have radiaclly changed what was.For me and many others, becoming a physician an almost sacred achievement. It signifies that you have proven that you are exceptionally competent, academically, intellectually and socially. You are the cream of the crop. You have earned the right to enter this rare world of human medicine and be trained as complete physician. To be called "physician", in my opinion, is something that is earned through long years of toil and sacrifice and only a handful of people are given this incredible reponsibility.
Similar, yet not quite the same. Dentistry is a medical specialty in its own right, and students entering the profession are assumed to have chosen dentistry as their profession based on their knowledge and previous exposure to dentistry.Originally posted by heelpain
Going off the topic a little...We could say the same thing for dental training too. Since, medicine is all connected; the dental students should have the same rotations as the med students. For instance, a dentist must know that under certain circumstances a root canal can cause damage to a sinus lining. Dentists treat patients for neuralgia. They would also benefit from doing a psych rotation. Unfortunately, there would be no time for all of these rotations.
I do not mean to offend you, but podaitry students are not medical students, though podiatry students are trained according to the medical model (PA students are also trained according to the medical model, but this does not make them medical students, either). Check out www.ama-assn.org, click the "Patients" tab, and go to "Becoming a Physician."Originally posted by Toejam
It might be a complex issue, but I don't see it that way.
When I was a 3rd year student, a few of my colleagues and I were so upset at our lack of clinical training that we set up a meeting with the then Dean of Students. He was nice enough, but basically said that the reason we didn't have more clinical training (mostly in hospitals) was because of money and not all hospitals would welcome podiatry students as regular medical students. This really deflated me, to say the least. At that point I really began to feel like a second-class citizen. I kept thinking to myself, "if it's money, why do other med students who are paying the same tuition as me and sometimes less have the opportunity to rotate through hospitals during their final two years"? And, if it's because we're podiatry students, then are we really being trained to be doctors, or some peripheral health care provider"?
The explanation that some hospitals were reluctant to have podiatry students as regular medical students REALLY ticked me off. I felt some serious indignation at this thought because I knew that our coursework in the first two years was at least 90% identical of what a medical student experienced. . . . .
They persistently look at pod students and podiatry as some kind of ancillary branch of medicine, but not as medical students and physicians. . . .