Signing with MD, when is it not ok?

[petomed]

We work hard to become licensed, both initially and during each renewal period in order to not lose our license. I come from the world of engineering but this is even more true in medicine.

I'm taking an online course right now and the course designer is signing their name with MD. Searching for their full name online points me to the Caribbean. I've been able to cross-check this with another institution, where this person has the exact same headshot. There, the credentials do in fact point to the Caribbean.

From what I gather, this person received their MD in the Caribbean and for one reason or another, never did a residency in the USA. Their credentials are listed as some kind of thoracic surgeon in the Caribbean, but there is no clinical detail of them being active as such, or in any other clinical setting for that matter--in the USA. They seem to have jumped into academics and received a few medical affiliated rubber stamp certifications from medical schools that offer other programs.

I know next to nothing about the pathway from MD in the Caribbean to MD in the USA. The little I've read points to the need to pass Step exams and then get a residency in order to become licensed as an MD in Florida. From there you can go anywhere. But not performing a residency doesn't necessarily preclude you from translating that Caribbean MD to USA MD. Apparently, there may be some alternate way to still sign with MD if you acquire certain affiliated certification from medical-type institutions. As for being a clinician, I believe you still need to perform a residency in order to be licensed by any one of our 50 states.

What's the deal here? Is there a way to look this person up without knowing which state they may have the MD awarded in? They're authoring coursework for regionally accredited post-bacc programs and they're just an awful course designer. I plan on writing a scathing review to the school once my official transcripts are in hand and I'd like to know whether this person is abusing the letters MD by signing their name with them if they don't have the right to do so.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Crayola227]

We work hard to become licensed, both initially and during each renewal period in order to not lose our license. I come from the world of engineering but this is even more true in medicine.

I'm taking an online course right now and the course designer is signing their name with MD. Searching for their full name online points me to the Caribbean. I've been able to cross-check this with another institution, where this person has the exact same headshot. There, the credentials do in fact point to the Caribbean.

From what I gather, this person received their MD in the Caribbean and for one reason or another, never did a residency in the USA. Their credentials are listed as some kind of thoracic surgeon in the Caribbean, but there is no clinical detail of them being active as such, or in any other clinical setting for that matter--in the USA. They seem to have jumped into academics and received a few medical affiliated rubber stamp certifications from medical schools that offer other programs.

I know next to nothing about the pathway from MD in the Caribbean to MD in the USA. The little I've read points to the need to pass Step exams and then get a residency in order to become licensed as an MD in Florida. From there you can go anywhere. But not performing a residency doesn't necessarily preclude you from translating that Caribbean MD to USA MD. Apparently, there may be some alternate way to still sign with MD if you acquire certain affiliated certification from medical-type institutions. As for being a clinician, I believe you still need to perform a residency in order to be licensed by any one of our 50 states.

What's the deal here? Is there a way to look this person up without knowing which state they may have the MD awarded in? They're authoring coursework for regionally accredited post-bacc programs and they're just an awful course designer. I plan on writing a scathing review to the school once my official transcripts are in hand and I'd like to know whether this person is abusing the letters MD by signing their name with them if they don't have the right to do so.

If they graduated from an accredited medical school that conferred on them the MD, they can use MD, even if it was in the Carribean. Period.

They need to be careful in some situations where they use the title of doctor, the MD initials, or describe themselves as physician, that they are not violating any local laws about practicing medicine without a license, if they have no license. Software engineering doesn’t sound like such a situation. (They need to be careful even if they don't use those things to identify themselves that they aren't practicing medicine without a license anyway. But even more when identifying that way because the whole thing is people will take what you say about health potentially more seriously).

 

[petomed]

If they graduated from an accredited medical school that conferred on them the MD, they can use MD, even if it was in the Carribean. Period.

They need to be careful in some situations where they use the title of doctor, the MD initials, or describe themselves as physician, that they are not violating any local laws about practicing medicine without a license, if they have no license. Software engineering doesn’t sound like such a situation. (They need to be careful even if they don't use those things to identify themselves that they aren't practicing medicine without a license anyway. But even more when identifying that way because the whole thing is people will take what you say about health potentially more seriously).

Thank you for the reply. It's the same way in engineering. Many localities come down hard on people for describing themselves as an Engineer if they in fact have no license number with the state board to support using that word.

In this case, the person wrote the lectures and presentations for a post-bacc lvl Anatomy course. They show their name as John Doe, cert. A, MS, MD and they quite enjoy referencing medical applications for the material whenever possible. For all intensive purposes, they are 100% selling themselves as a licensed MD. I'm not sure with which locality this would be paired because it's an online course. I would guess it's the state in which the university physically dwells?

 

[Crayola227]

Thank you for the reply. It's the same way in engineering. Many localities come down hard on people for describing themselves as an Engineer if they in fact have no license number with the state board to support using that word.

In this case, the person wrote the lectures and presentations for a post-bacc lvl Anatomy course. They show their name as John Doe, cert. A, MS, MD and they quite enjoy referencing medical applications for the material whenever possible. I'm not sure with which locality this would be paired because it's an online course. I would guess it's the state in which the university physically dwells?

Probably, that I don't know. If you look up their school and it's accredited then their use of MD is probably fine, especially if they're not doing anything amounting to giving out medical advice.

 

[petomed]

Probably, that I don't know. If you look up their school and it's accredited then their use of MD is probably fine, especially if they're not doing anything amounting to giving out medical advice.

Yeah that doesn't fly in engineering. You might receive a B.S., M.S., or PhD in engineering. But you're not an engineer on paper unless you're licensed with the state board in which you claim to be an engineer.

 

[Crayola227]

Yeah that doesn't fly in engineering. You might receive a B.S., M.S., or PhD in engineering. But you're not an engineer on paper unless you're licensed with the state board in which you claim to be an engineer.

Well, that isn't how it works with physicians. What makes you a physician or an MD, is the valid accredited degree awarded. A license to practice is just that. It's similar for lawyers as well.

 

[DocJanItor]

Yeah that doesn't fly in engineering. You might receive a B.S., M.S., or PhD in engineering. But you're not an engineer on paper unless you're licensed with the state board in which you claim to be an engineer.

That's not necessarily true. It's true that in most civil and structural engineering jobs you need to take the FE and then the PE to verify your credentials. This is generally a requirement of working on public projects, but you can also work as an engineer under someone who has a PE. Also, many private companies do not require or even necessarily reward taking the PE/FE as many of their projects do not require state certification.

 

[petomed]

That's not necessarily true. It's true that in most civil and structural engineering jobs you need to take the FE and then the PE to verify your credentials. This is generally a requirement of working on public projects, but you can also work as an engineer under someone who has a PE. Also, many private companies do not require or even necessarily reward taking the PE/FE as many of their projects do not require state certification.

Yes, all true. That being said, go ask the applicable state's board if / when that unlicensed person can call themselves an engineer in any context. My bet is that under nearly all circumstances, including those which you've mentioned--the board will say not to call yourself an engineer without a license.

Edit:
Unless you've passed the first exam. Then you're an Intern Engineer.

 

[DocJanItor]

Yes, all true. That being said, go ask the applicable state's board if / when that unlicensed person can call themselves an engineer in any context. My bet is that under nearly all circumstances, including those which you've mentioned--the board will say not to call yourself an engineer without a license.

Edit:
Unless you've passed the first exam. Then you're an Intern Engineer.

You can call yourself an engineer all you want, but you can't sign as an engineer or approve designs. It's a legal distinction vs a professional distinction. I was told the first day of engineering school that I was now an engineer, and I remain an engineer to this day. I just happen to be a doctor as well. 😂

 

[petomed]

You can call yourself an engineer all you want, but you can't sign as an engineer or approve designs. It's a legal distinction vs a professional distinction. I was told the first day of engineering school that I was now an engineer, and I remain an engineer to this day. I just happen to be a doctor as well. 😂

You can call yourself an engineer all you want, but you can't sign as an engineer or approve designs. It's a legal distinction vs a professional distinction. I was told the first day of engineering school that I was now an engineer, and I remain an engineer to this day. I just happen to be a doctor as well. 😂

I follow your logic. So then, you would consider all your peers who completed medical school to be doctors/physicians? Even if they never pursued or obtained a license to practice?

 

[Bonne Nuit]

I follow your logic. So then, you would consider all your peers who completed medical school to be doctors/physicians? Even if they never pursued or obtained a license to practice?

I do, and this very standard for the field.

There are many MDs without residencies working industry, education, finance, and they are still referred to as doctors. There are doctors who retire and give up their licenses to practice, and they are still referred to as doctors. No matter the licensing status, MD still = Doctor of Medicine (and DO = Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine), irrespective of whether the MD/DO pursues residency.

Nobody in medicine gatekeeps the title of "doctor" for people who have completed their MD/DO. Guess it's different in engineering, I don't know, but you don't see it happen in this field.

 

[petomed]

I do, and this very standard for the field.

There are many MDs without residencies working industry, education, finance, and they are still referred to as doctors. There are doctors who retire and give up their licenses to practice, and they are still referred to as doctors. No matter the licensing status, MD still = Doctor of Medicine (and DO = Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine), irrespective of whether the MD/DO pursues residency.

Nobody in medicine gatekeeps the title of "doctor" for people who have completed their MD/DO. Guess it's different in engineering, I don't know, but you don't see it happen in this field.

I understand fully. The idea of listening to a lecturer, signing with Dr. John Doe, MD, talk about best clinical practices, when they themselves were never licensed to begin with, seems like a pretty solid quagmire though. Likewise, when I hear nurse I assume licensed RN. Lawyer, passed the bar.

 

[Bonne Nuit]

I understand fully. The idea of listening to a lecturer, signing with Dr. John Doe, MD, talk about best clinical practices, when they themselves were never licensed to begin with, seems like a pretty solid quagmire though. Likewise, when I hear nurse I assume licensed RN. Lawyer, passed the bar.

Quagmire to whom?

I have attended several medical school lectures given by non-practicing MDs/lecturers who had received medical degrees in another country and never pursued US medical licensure. I have never once considered their lack of US licensure a source of confusion or consternation. So long as my educational institution approves the material and it is accurate, I don't care at all who is communicating the information. It is a complete nonissue.

If you are this concerned now about who is allowed to communicate best clinical practices, you're in for a big headache in a couple years when some PhD virologist at your medical school presents you a slide of "clinical pearls for your third year."

 

[petomed]

Quagmire to whom?

I have attended several medical school lectures given by non-practicing MDs/lecturers who had received medical degrees in another country and never pursued US medical licensure. I have never once considered their lack of US licensure a source of confusion or consternation. So long as my educational institution approves the material and it is accurate, I don't care at all who is communicating the information. It is a complete nonissue.

If you are this concerned now about who is allowed to communicate best clinical practices, you're in for a big headache in a couple years when some PhD virologist at your medical school presents you a slide of "clinical pearls for your third year."

Indeed, I do disagree in some respects. Licensure represents a person demonstrating their ability to meet a minimum standard of practice in their field. Failure to obtain the license, if said license is in fact available in your field, or to have it revoked unwilling after obtaining it, gives me reason for pause. This person either had a criminal background, was incapable of demonstrating theoretical competency via examinations, or was unable to secure the tertiary facets required by their licensing board, such as residency, recommendations, accredited academic credentials, etc.

I have no problem receiving lecture information from the qualified individual. In your example, the virologist had a PhD in virology, perhaps even an MD along the way. They're staying completely within their lane if they advise the audience on anything that falls within their domain, such as virology. But for that same person to be advising folks on how to interact with patients, when they themselves haven't had practice doing so within the confines recognized by their peers who do interact regularly with patients--is unethical. The only exception, in my opinion, is if that person mentions along the way that they do not have a license to practice medicine, which may be assumed by those to whom they are lecturing.

To be clear, if the PhD virologist from your example begins to lecture me in 'clinical pearls for your third year', this would in all likelihood be just fine. This is because there is no license available for said domain. Further, they probably have substantial experience in observing and supporting third year medical students as they progress through their education.

 

[Crayola227]

Indeed, I do disagree in some respects. Licensure represents a person demonstrating their ability to meet a minimum standard of practice in their field. Failure to obtain the license, if said license is in fact available in your field, or to have it revoked unwilling after obtaining it, gives me reason for pause. This person either had a criminal background, was incapable of demonstrating theoretical competency via examinations, or was unable to secure the tertiary facets required by their licensing board, such as residency, recommendations, accredited academic credentials, etc.

I have no problem receiving lecture information from the qualified individual. In your example, the virologist had a PhD in virology, perhaps even an MD along the way. They're staying completely within their lane if they advise the audience on anything that falls within their domain, such as virology. But for that same person to be advising folks on how to interact with patients, when they themselves haven't had practice doing so within the confines recognized by their peers who do interact regularly with patients--is unethical. The only exception, in my opinion, is if that person mentions along the way that they do not have a license to practice medicine, which may be assumed by those to whom they are lecturing.

To be clear, if the PhD virologist from your example begins to lecture me in 'clinical pearls for your third year', this would in all likelihood be just fine. This is because there is no license available for said domain. Further, they probably have substantial experience in observing and supporting third year medical students as they progress through their education.

No, it also requires completing an intern year of residency at minimum. And there's plenty of reasons for a physician not to pursue that.

 

[petomed]

No, it also requires completing an intern year of residency at minimum. And there's plenty of reasons for a physician not to pursue that.

Absolutely. Many physicians go into research, pharmaceuticals, etc. But they should not with the same breath be advising others within the context of their advisee's believing they are fully credentialed in clinical practice. It's misleading and in today's day and age, you're highly likely to find a lawyer that will engage them with litigation.

 

[Bonne Nuit]

Absolutely. Many physicians go into research, pharmaceuticals, etc. But they should not with the same breath be advising others within the context of their advisee's believing they are fully credentialed in clinical practice. It's misleading and in today's day and age, you're highly likely to find a lawyer that will engage them with litigation.

Nobody is suing non-licensed MD/DO medical school lecturers for misrepresentation if they teach clinical skills, what are you even on about? None of what you said is based in reality. It is pure fantasy.

You will be taught clinical skills by standardized patients, many of whom are just regular old members of your community. You will be taught clinical skills by RNs. You will be taught clinical skills by random technicians. You will be taught clinical skills by PhDs. You will be taught clinical skills by more senior medical students. And, yes, you are likely to be taught clinical skills by MD/DO/foreign medical doctors who are not licensed to practice in the US for whatever reason. You will not able to assess, in real time, whether or not the information you're being presented is strictly within the presenter's "scope". If any of this bothers you, I suggest reconsidering your choice to enter this type of training.

People in medical school care about the accuracy of information and nobody - absolutely nobody - gets bent out of whack about deeply analyzing people's credentials and whether or not they pass a preclinical medical student's assessment of their expertise.

I strongly encourage you to reframe your thinking on this matter before you enter medical school for your own sanity as well as how the people who control your fate perceive you. If you brought your complaint to my medical school's admin in the way you presented it here, you would quickly earn a reputation as a pretentious, gate-keepy, pain-in-the-butt student who is more concerned about who is "better" than what is correct. Whether or not that's a true representation of your feelings, it really reads like you just want to dunk on people who fail to live up to some random standards you just made up in your head.

 

[Crayola227]

Absolutely. Many physicians go into research, pharmaceuticals, etc. But they should not with the same breath be advising others within the context of their advisee's believing they are fully credentialed in clinical practice. It's misleading and in today's day and age, you're highly likely to find a lawyer that will engage them with litigation.

Nah, only if they're giving medical advice or practicing medicine without a license. The MD itself includes direct clinical training, and has been pointed out more clinical hours than what PAs or others get with their training. Which isn't to say that justifies an MD only practicing without a license, but they do have clinical experience and education they can speak to.

 

[petomed]

Nobody is suing non-licensed MD/DO medical school lecturers for misrepresentation if they teach clinical skills, what are you even on about? None of what you said is based in reality. It is pure fantasy.

You will be taught clinical skills by standardized patients, many of whom are just regular old members of your community. You will be taught clinical skills by RNs. You will be taught clinical skills by random technicians. You will be taught clinical skills by PhDs. You will be taught clinical skills by more senior medical students. And, yes, you are likely to be taught clinical skills by MD/DO/foreign medical doctors who are not licensed to practice in the US for whatever reason. You will not able to assess, in real time, whether or not the information you're being presented is strictly within the presenter's "scope". If any of this bothers you, I suggest reconsidering your choice to enter this type of training.

People in medical school care about the accuracy of information and nobody - absolutely nobody - gets bent out of whack about deeply analyzing people's credentials and whether or not they pass a preclinical medical student's assessment of their expertise.

I strongly encourage you to reframe your thinking on this matter before you enter medical school for your own sanity as well as how the people who control your fate perceive you. If you brought your complaint to my medical school's admin in the way you presented it here, you would quickly earn a reputation as a pretentious, gate-keepy, pain-in-the-butt student who is more concerned about who is "better" than what is correct. Whether or not that's a true representation of your feelings, it really reads like you just want to dunk on people who fail to live up to some random standards you just made up in your head.

I appreciate the discussion and agree, one can learn a great many things from a great many people and I very much look forward to doing so in the coming years. Such a nuance, as is being discussed here, is not nearly enough for me to "...reconsider my choice to enter this type of training." It seems I've struck something of a chord of yours here and for that I do apologize. The topic of interest is misrepresentation, not the ability to learn from others.

Reframing my thinking is the point of this thread. I'm familiar with how things are done but only through the lenses that I've been wearing. While I may have my own preconceived notions and personal opinions, that does not preclude my ability to learn how things are done in medicine. While I may still disagree in certain respects whilst learning the 'truths' of professional misrepresentation, or lack-thereof, in medicine--it seems harsh for this to somehow translate to an internal need of mine to "...dunk on people who fail to live up to some random standards I just made up in my head."

Perhaps you haven't dealt much with engineers. It's our job to learn the boundaries of every system such that we can successfully operate within those bounds. That's all I'm doing here and will 100% do this throughout my career moving forward.

My intent with this thread was to determine whether the person receiving payment through an institution for lecturing me and several others in Anatomy and signing with first, last, MD--was 'ok'. It would seem that this is in fact acceptable in the world of medicine. While that does surprise me a bit, I can understand why it's the case.

 

[Bonne Nuit]

I appreciate the discussion and agree, one can learn a great many things from a great many people and I very much look forward to doing so in the coming years. Such a nuance, as is being discussed here, is not nearly enough for me to "...reconsider my choice to enter this type of training." It seems I've struck something of a chord of yours here and for that I do apologize. The topic of interest is misrepresentation, not the ability to learn from others.

Reframing my thinking is the point of this thread. I'm familiar with how things are done but only through the lenses that I've been wearing. While I may have my own preconceived notions and personal opinions, that does not preclude my ability to learn how things are done in medicine. While I may still disagree in certain respects whilst learning the 'truths' of professional misrepresentation, or lack-thereof, in medicine--it seems harsh for this to somehow translate to an internal need of mine to "...dunk on people who fail to live up to some random standards I just made up in my head."

Perhaps you haven't dealt much with engineers. It's our job to learn the boundaries of every system such that we can successfully operate within those bounds. That's all I'm doing here and will 100% do this throughout my career moving forward.

My intent with this thread was to determine whether the person receiving payment through an institution for lecturing me and several others in Anatomy and signing with first, last, MD--was 'ok'. It would seem that this is in fact acceptable in the world of medicine. While that does surprise me a bit, I can understand why it's the case.

In fact, I have dealt extensively with engineers, software designers, programmers, and other technically-oriented professionals in my former career, and I am observing some familiar patterns in your posts. While engineers are typically incredibly intelligent, sharp, logical people, I have also observed a tendency, in some, towards myopia, rigidity, and difficulty working within loosely-defined systems. Of course, I don't know you or anything about you, so I'm not saying you are any of these things as a person - just that your posts in this thread are communicating discomfort with roles that are "outside the box" (i.e., an unlicensed MD lecturer) and it feels very similar to conversations I used to have when I worked in tech.

I think the engineering mindset (for lack of a better descriptor) can and does translate beautifully to medicine, but I can also see where it can limit those who make the switch. Medicine is a lot more loosey-goosey than engineering, which is why medicine is often described as an art as much as it a science. The "rules" vary from hospital to hospital, school to school, department to department, and sometimes person to person. This can annoy the most easygoing, carefree student, and it can absolutely come as a culture shock for very logically-oriented/policy-minded people (not just engineers).

When you ask "Why?" questions in medicine, you'll often get responses like "Just because", "It's how I was taught", "That's the way we do things here", "It's fine the way it is." This is unlikely to be satisfactory to you, because hand-wavy responses aren't very acceptable in engineering, but it's common in medicine. So when I encouraged you to reframe your mindset "for your own sanity", I meant that not to be snarky or rude, but quite literally: you'll be a much happier student if you can find a way to sit with uncertainty, shifting expectations, insufficient information, and fluid roles/rules/systems.

 

[TeddyBoomBoom]

Hard stop:

“MD” has NOTHING to do with licensure. It is strictly a college degree as is phd, jd, mph, etc.

Medical licensure is obtained through the state medical boards. One of their pre-requisites is (usually) an MD/DO degree but can be (rarely) an international degree like MBSS.

If you graduated from an accredited college with a diploma that says “MD” then you are 100% able to sign anything you like as Bob Smith, MD.

It doesn’t make you a physician, and it has no bearing on licensure, but it’s a proper title.

Otoh, I do remember feeling weird about calling my self “Dr. BoomBoom” in that short period of time between graduation and licensure 🤷

- teddy booms

 

[Crayola227]

Hard stop:

“MD” has NOTHING to do with licensure. It is strictly a college degree as is phd, jd, mph, etc.

Medical licensure is obtained through the state medical boards. One of their pre-requisites is (usually) an MD/DO degree but can be (rarely) an international degree like MBSS.

If you graduated from an accredited college with a diploma that says “MD” then you are 100% able to sign anything you like as Bob Smith, MD.

It doesn’t make you a physician, and it has no bearing on licensure, but it’s a proper title.

Otoh, I do remember feeling weird about calling my self “Dr. BoomBoom” in that short period of time between graduation and licensure

- teddy booms

You are correct, except that it does make you a physician, full stop.

Medical boards and the law does govern who can call themselves a medical physician, (I don't pretend to understand why you have naturopathic physician as allowed) but the law does regulate using that term, and you do NOT have to be licensed to refer to yourself as such.

Anyone who argues this is more than welcome to contact their state medical board to get an answer directly from them.

 

[TeddyBoomBoom]

You are correct, except that it does make you a physician, full stop.

Medical boards and the law does govern who can call themselves a medical physician, (I don't pretend to understand why you have naturopathic physician as allowed) but the law does regulate using that term, and you do NOT have to be licensed to refer to yourself as such.

Anyone who argues this is more than welcome to contact their state medical board to get an answer directly from them.

I had no idea there was such a thing as a “non-medical physician.”

🤷‍♀️

 

[Goro]

I appreciate the discussion and agree, one can learn a great many things from a great many people and I very much look forward to doing so in the coming years. Such a nuance, as is being discussed here, is not nearly enough for me to "...reconsider my choice to enter this type of training." It seems I've struck something of a chord of yours here and for that I do apologize. The topic of interest is misrepresentation, not the ability to learn from others.

Reframing my thinking is the point of this thread. I'm familiar with how things are done but only through the lenses that I've been wearing. While I may have my own preconceived notions and personal opinions, that does not preclude my ability to learn how things are done in medicine. While I may still disagree in certain respects whilst learning the 'truths' of professional misrepresentation, or lack-thereof, in medicine--it seems harsh for this to somehow translate to an internal need of mine to "...dunk on people who fail to live up to some random standards I just made up in my head."

Perhaps you haven't dealt much with engineers. It's our job to learn the boundaries of every system such that we can successfully operate within those bounds. That's all I'm doing here and will 100% do this throughout my career moving forward.

My intent with this thread was to determine whether the person receiving payment through an institution for lecturing me and several others in Anatomy and signing with first, last, MD--was 'ok'. It would seem that this is in fact acceptable in the world of medicine. While that does surprise me a bit, I can understand why it's the case.

You seem to have a mindset that's something like "How dare this person sign his name with MD!!!???"

He went through medical school and therefore earned the the right to sign his name that way, that's why. He can call himself "doctor" too, but he can't give medical advice.

Hell, I have a PhD and I can call myself "Doctor Goro". It's very helpful in getting something I want from hotel staff.

If the med school thinks that your faculty can do the job, then that's the end of the story. It is OK.

You do you and stop worrying about him.

 

[petomed]

You seem to have a mindset that's something like "How dare this person sign his name with MD!!!???"

He went through medical school and therefore earned the the right to sign his name that way, that's why. He can call himself "doctor" too, but he can't give medical advice.

Hell, I have a PhD and I can call myself "Doctor Goro". It's very helpful in getting something I want from hotel staff.

If the med school thinks that your faculty can do the job, then that's the end of the story. It is OK.

You do you and stop worrying about him.

I'd just like to point out that I believed signing with MD meant you must have a license. I've since learned it does not.

Additionally, I'm not in medical school. I'm in this person's post-bacc Anatomy course. Unlike the other five courses I've taken with the same institution, I would never recommend someone take this course. This is what led me to question the individual's credentials.

 

[PhD_to_DO]

Nobody is suing non-licensed MD/DO medical school lecturers for misrepresentation if they teach clinical skills, what are you even on about? None of what you said is based in reality. It is pure fantasy.

You will be taught clinical skills by standardized patients, many of whom are just regular old members of your community. You will be taught clinical skills by RNs. You will be taught clinical skills by random technicians. You will be taught clinical skills by PhDs. You will be taught clinical skills by more senior medical students. And, yes, you are likely to be taught clinical skills by MD/DO/foreign medical doctors who are not licensed to practice in the US for whatever reason. You will not able to assess, in real time, whether or not the information you're being presented is strictly within the presenter's "scope". If any of this bothers you, I suggest reconsidering your choice to enter this type of training.

People in medical school care about the accuracy of information and nobody - absolutely nobody - gets bent out of whack about deeply analyzing people's credentials and whether or not they pass a preclinical medical student's assessment of their expertise.

I strongly encourage you to reframe your thinking on this matter before you enter medical school for your own sanity as well as how the people who control your fate perceive you. If you brought your complaint to my medical school's admin in the way you presented it here, you would quickly earn a reputation as a pretentious, gate-keepy, pain-in-the-butt student who is more concerned about who is "better" than what is correct. Whether or not that's a true representation of your feelings, it really reads like you just want to dunk on people who fail to live up to some random standards you just made up in your head.

100% true. Most of the docs who teach the clinical skills & OMT courses at my school are unlicensed for whatever reason. Some practiced for years and retired but a few made a choice to not seek a residency or to not seek licensure after residency for various reasons. I don’t consider them teaching clinical skills and OMT as being somehow, “unethical”.

 

[snooper]

We work hard to become licensed, both initially and during each renewal period in order to not lose our license. I come from the world of engineering but this is even more true in medicine.

I'm taking an online course right now and the course designer is signing their name with MD. Searching for their full name online points me to the Caribbean. I've been able to cross-check this with another institution, where this person has the exact same headshot. There, the credentials do in fact point to the Caribbean.

From what I gather, this person received their MD in the Caribbean and for one reason or another, never did a residency in the USA. Their credentials are listed as some kind of thoracic surgeon in the Caribbean, but there is no clinical detail of them being active as such, or in any other clinical setting for that matter--in the USA. They seem to have jumped into academics and received a few medical affiliated rubber stamp certifications from medical schools that offer other programs.

I know next to nothing about the pathway from MD in the Caribbean to MD in the USA. The little I've read points to the need to pass Step exams and then get a residency in order to become licensed as an MD in Florida. From there you can go anywhere. But not performing a residency doesn't necessarily preclude you from translating that Caribbean MD to USA MD. Apparently, there may be some alternate way to still sign with MD if you acquire certain affiliated certification from medical-type institutions. As for being a clinician, I believe you still need to perform a residency in order to be licensed by any one of our 50 states.

What's the deal here? Is there a way to look this person up without knowing which state they may have the MD awarded in? They're authoring coursework for regionally accredited post-bacc programs and they're just an awful course designer. I plan on writing a scathing review to the school once my official transcripts are in hand and I'd like to know whether this person is abusing the letters MD by signing their name with them if they don't have the right to do so.

If they graduated from an accredited medical school that conferred on them the MD, they can use MD, even if it was in the Carribean. Period.

They need to be careful in some situations where they use the title of doctor, the MD initials, or describe themselves as physician, that they are not violating any local laws about practicing medicine without a license, if they have no license. Software engineering doesn’t sound like such a situation. (They need to be careful even if they don't use those things to identify themselves that they aren't practicing medicine without a license anyway. But even more when identifying that way because the whole thing is people will take what you say about health potentially more seriously).

Recognition of foreign degrees, see Recognition of Foreign Qualifications | International Affairs Office
There are plenty of people with foreign MDs that use their degrees without ever having been licensed in the US.

 

[TragicalDrFaust]

It sounds like you have a problem with the quality of this professor’s instruction. I don’t think you’ll get anywhere with the school claiming they don’t have sufficient credentials. You have a right to bring up that you’re having issues with admin, but you might have more traction focusing on the aspects of their instructor that aren’t conducive to your learning instead of trying to undermine their credentials, which have been verified and approved by the school already.

 

[petomed]

100% true. Most of the docs who teach the clinical skills & OMT courses at my school are unlicensed for whatever reason. Some practiced for years and retired but a few made a choice to not seek a residency or to not seek licensure after residency for various reasons. I don’t consider them teaching clinical skills and OMT as being somehow, “unethical”.

Practicing without a license when one is required is both unethical and illegal. I thought MD implied license. I've since learned it doesn't. The horse is quite dead here.

 

[petomed]

Recognition of foreign degrees, see Recognition of Foreign Qualifications | International Affairs Office
There are plenty of people with foreign MDs that use their degrees without ever having been licensed in the US.

Thank you for the reference. This lesson has been learned.

 

[petomed]

It sounds like you have a problem with the quality of this professor’s instruction. I don’t think you’ll get anywhere with the school claiming they don’t have sufficient credentials. You have a right to bring up that you’re having issues with admin, but you might have more traction focusing on the aspects of their instructor that aren’t conducive to your learning instead of trying to undermine their credentials, which have been verified and approved by the school already.

Indeed. I thought MD implied license. I've since learned it doesn't.

 

[hopkinsgal2022]

I think you’re conflating degree with license, OP. An MD is a degree earned upon graduation, like a PhD or JD, and as long as that degree wasn’t revoked by one’s medical school for some sort of misconduct, the MD stands and the initials may be used, regardless of whether one pursues a medical license. US medical licensure entails 3 USMLE exam steps and at least one year of US residency training. However, someone who completed medical school and subsequent surgical training in another country can absolutely call themself a physician and use the letters MD, even if they aren’t licensed here. Similarly, the letters JD may be used even when one has not yet passed the bar.

 

[Candidate2017]

In fact, I have dealt extensively with engineers, software designers, programmers, and other technically-oriented professionals in my former career, and I am observing some familiar patterns in your posts. While engineers are typically incredibly intelligent, sharp, logical people, I have also observed a tendency, in some, towards myopia, rigidity, and difficulty working within loosely-defined systems.

I'm not buying that OP is logical.

The funny thing is technical people like OP often fail to see when they are being illogical and emotional. OP is merely mad at their instructor for perceived poor instruction and makes the illogical leap that someone who has earned a degree cannot put the degree next to their name and that a degree can only be used if the degree holder is licensed. Does not compute.

 

[petomed]

The funny thing is technical people like OP often fail to see when they are being illogical and emotional. OP is merely mad at their instructor for perceived poor instruction and makes the illogical leap that someone who has earned a degree cannot put the degree next to their name and that a degree can only be used if the degree holder is licensed. Does not compute.

You're more than welcome to spend time picking apart my posts and the posts of others. I will not tell you that you're wrong, however I'm happy to receive the insights of your time. Allopathic physicians that have a current license in my state write that license as MDxxxxx, where xxxxx is their unique sequence of numbers. As I've said before, I thought MD = license. The greater wisdom of SDN has come through once again and taught me otherwise.