Slam on ODs

[IndianaOD]

There it was, right on the SDN homepage. A DO ophthalmologist slamming optometry. Where's the moderator there? Ahh, its not really surprising anymore. Freaking ridiculous.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[EyeBaller]

Yeah I see it.. Did you see the comments too?

JP on May 3rd, 2007 3:10 pm

I'm glad this DO takes a stand against optometrists trying to expand scope of practice. It shows me not every physician is complacent to the threat of poor health care by unqualified people.

I don't understand why this is allowed to go on the front page of a site like this.

I also don't really understand why the "biggest problem with her specialty" is optometrists trying to do surgery in her state (CA) when ODs can't even treat glaucoma independently yet without jumping through hoops. Seems like surgery is a long long way away. I can't see ODs taking over her much loved cataract surgeries in the near future.

 

[still_confused]

i hope she read the interview with the plastic surgeon further down the page......

 

[luckyfool]

The DO ophthalmologist's comment on optometrists is simply ignorant and one-sided. Her inappropriate attack on another respected profession just shows you how much she feels threatened by ODs. I don't know why she feels that way but all ODs want to do surgery?? Many people pursue optometry because it doesn't involve surgery! I, for one.

 

[jc812]

I don't get why Ophthalmologists see Optometrists as threats. It's like saying that Oral Surgeons see Dentists as threats. The two are related, but very different fields.

I've read in the Medicine forum in the past, how Ophthalmologists look down upon Optometrists.. and how ODs are incompetent in one way or another. Why is this?

Also, I agree with Lucky.. I want to go into optometry because it DOESN'T involve surgery. I don't see ODs as wanna be Ophthalmologists like how they do.

 

[qwopty99]

link? or is it gone?

 

[r_salis]

link? or is it gone?

http://studentdoctor.net/blog/2007/...cunningham-ahumada-do-ophthalmology/#more-125

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

There it was, right on the SDN homepage. A DO ophthalmologist slamming optometry. Where's the moderator there? Ahh, its not really surprising anymore. Freaking ridiculous.

You're offended by this? Christ man, if this was the worst the medicine said about you guys, y'all would be in great shape.

 

[still_confused]

You're offended by this? Christ man, if this was the worst the medicine said about you guys, y'all would be in great shape.

so its ok for you guys to belittle us as long as its slightly more respectfuly then calling us "refraction monkeys?"

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

so its ok for you guys to belittle us as long as its slightly more respectfuly then calling us "refraction monkeys?"

The ophthalmologist mentions optometry all of one time:

"Organized optometry continues to try to side-step the existing and entirely adequate route to becoming an eye surgeon, the ophthalmology residency, by legislating changes in their scope of practice to include surgery."

How is that horribly bashing ODs?

 

[luckyfool]

The ophthalmologist mentions optometry all of one time:

"Organized optometry continues to try to side-step the existing and entirely adequate route to becoming an eye surgeon, the ophthalmology residency, by legislating changes in their scope of practice to include surgery."

How is that horribly bashing ODs?

it's like saying mexican immigrants are trying to side-step Americans and steal their jobs...which is utterly untrue.

 

[eyelectric]

I agree that in the spirit of professionalism she should have chosen her words better (or refrained from mentioning it altogether). On the other hand, it really shows what the profession is up against. This is why we all need to support the AOA and our political action committees.

 

[IndianaOD]

The DO ophthalmologist's comment on optometrists is simply ignorant and one-sided. Her inappropriate attack on another respected profession just shows you how much she feels threatened by ODs. I don't know why she feels that way but all ODs want to do surgery?? Many people pursue optometry because it doesn't involve surgery! I, for one.

It is ignorant, I agree totally. Most MDs have NO idea how ODs are trained. Its interesting to see a DO saying this. You can go over to the med forums and see MDs slamming DOs all the time. DOs used to have very little respect and privileges until medicine gave up and just absorbed them. An OD like me with a residency has 5 years of eye related training (you could say 4 if you consider most of the 1st year is systemic). A general eye MD has basically 3 years, the first of which they come in knowing basically nothing. I just don't see the basis of all their snooty air of superiority. It makes me proud to be an OD, most of whom are very down to earth good people.

 

[IndianaOD]

Yeah I see it.. Did you see the comments too?



I don't understand why this is allowed to go on the front page of a site like this.

I also don't really understand why the "biggest problem with her specialty" is optometrists trying to do surgery in her state (CA) when ODs can't even treat glaucoma independently yet without jumping through hoops. Seems like surgery is a long long way away. I can't see ODs taking over her much loved cataract surgeries in the near future.

Yeah, I tried to post a rebuttal in the comments section. It never made it in, got moderated right out. Imagine that. Double standard, do ya think?

 

[EyeBaller]

Yeah, I tried to post a rebuttal in the comments section. It never made it in, got moderated right out. Imagine that. Double standard, do ya think?

The comment that was posted which I quoted has now been removed.. I guess some moderation has happened.

 

[SDN]

I'm sorry about the comment from Dr. Cunningham. I don't know if she meant the comment to be inflammatory, but I certainly understand the frustration.

I moderated two comments from the site earlier today. One was from a student that made inflammatory statements about ODs and the other (I'm assuming IndianaODs) pointing out the post. IndianaOD was correct that the person's statement was inappropriate which is why I removed both the original post and his (referencing that post).

Because SDN is a membership, I'll leave it to you as a group to decide if SDN should remove her statement from the article. However, I'm not sure if that will help or hurt the overall issue of OD practice rights. It may be more valuable to use this opportunity to discuss why there is this perception of infringement by the ophthalmology community and how SDN as a community can change these perceptions.

 

[KHE]

Because SDN is a membership, I'll leave it to you as a group to decide if SDN should remove her statement from the article. However, I'm not sure if that will help or hurt the overall issue of OD practice rights. It may be more valuable to use this opportunity to discuss why there is this perception of infringement by the ophthalmology community and how SDN as a community can change these perceptions.

Dr. Burnett,

Your idea is good in theory but in practice I do not think that discussion on these forums will lead to anything.

SDN is made up mostly of students, wanna-be students and residents. Unfortunately, NONE of these groups has an adequate frame of reference on any of these issues to offer any sort of meaningful opinion.

What should happen is that people from each profession need to get together at a hotel somewhere for a few days and hash some of these issues out. And the people at that meeting should NOT be members of the AOA or the AAO because those are both essentially mouth piece organizations who are obligated to go along with the party line.

The people at the meeting need to be "respected elders" from both sides who do not have lengthy histories af legislative and PAC battles. It's outrageous that ODs try to expand their scope into the surgical realm without adequate training but its just as outrageous for ophthalmology to claim that there is no way an OD can remove a superficial foreign body, or to wave a bottle of tropicamide around in a state legislature house proclaiming that "this stuff can kill you." We need to have resonable compromises from reasonable people. I think that right now, no one in either organizations' positions of power is all that reasonable.

 

[EyeBaller]

I'm sorry about the comment from Dr. Cunningham. I don't know if she meant the comment to be inflammatory, but I certainly understand the frustration.

I moderated two comments from the site earlier today. One was from a student that made inflammatory statements about ODs and the other (I'm assuming IndianaODs) pointing out the post. IndianaOD was correct that the person's statement was inappropriate which is why I removed both the original post and his (referencing that post).

Because SDN is a membership, I'll leave it to you as a group to decide if SDN should remove her statement from the article. However, I'm not sure if that will help or hurt the overall issue of OD practice rights. It may be more valuable to use this opportunity to discuss why there is this perception of infringement by the ophthalmology community and how SDN as a community can change these perceptions.

I think that the real problem is that SDN has some responsibility to keep an even playing field to all the "doctors" SDN represents. If there is discussion in the medical forums or optometry forums regarding scope of practice then that's one thing, but for visitors to this site reading these comments on the front page just gives an overall bad impression for this site.

And more to the point.. it's also simply unrealistic that the OD expansion is the biggest issue facing her specialty. The states where ODs have received some surgical procedures are states that need the access to care, because OMDs just do not want to practice there, especially true in Oklahoma. As long as OMDs continue to specialize in a particular area (cornea, retina, plastics etc) they will never be threatened by ODs expansion. And like I said before the expansion of surgical procedures for ODs is just not an issue in California. Her comments are really unfounded.

 

[SDN]

I think that the real problem is that SDN has some responsibility to keep an even playing field to all the "doctors" SDN represents. If there is discussion in the medical forums or optometry forums regarding scope of practice then that's one thing, but for visitors to this site reading these comments on the front page just gives an overall bad impression for this site.

I agree with your point. I've removed the statement.

Also, I have put a request to our mods to consider doing a joint article between optometry and ophthalmology exploring this issue. It's clearly an issue that is important to both communities and we should try to write an article that looks at it objectively and evenly.

 

[EyeBaller]

Also, I have put a request to our mods to consider doing a joint article between optometry and ophthalmology exploring this issue. It's clearly an issue that is important to both communities and we should try to write an article that looks at it objectively and evenly.

Great idea. This is exactly what SDN should be about. As students (and recent grads), we should be at the forefront of looking at how all our specialities can work together, not bashing each other while we are in school. And, all over the country ODs work closely with OMDs and have great referral relationships.

Looking at the articles on the front page, there haven't been many articles from non-MD sources. Another area that should be addressed.. in my opinion of course...

 

[qwopty99]

The ophthalmologist mentions optometry all of one time:

"Organized optometry continues to try to side-step the existing and entirely adequate route to becoming an eye surgeon, the ophthalmology residency, by legislating changes in their scope of practice to include surgery."

How is that horribly bashing ODs?

if this was all that was said, i don't find it offensive. partisan? yes. flagrantly offensive? not at all.

if her remarks were prefaced with, "In my opinion, ...", then i don't think anyone could criticize anything here.

she was asked for her opinion, and she gave it. i'd say SDN might have done more "wrong" by censoring her interview.


who cares anyways. she's a pretty young oph. she'll learn to get over little things like this, and so will the OD-students here on these boards.

 

[EyeBaller]

if this was all that was said, i don't find it offensive. partisan? yes. flagrantly offensive? not at all.

if her remarks were prefaced with, "In my opinion, ...", then i don't think anyone could criticize anything here.

she was asked for her opinion, and she gave it. i'd say SDN might have done more "wrong" by censoring her interview.


who cares anyways. she's a pretty young oph. she'll learn to get over little things like this, and so will the OD-students here on these boards.

Turning it around, is it possible that soon-to-be OMDs reading this interview will feel threatened by optometry after having read her comments? Will that affect how these OMDs will see ODs when they are out in practice?

It's SDNs responsibility as a public forum to maintain neutrality towards the "network of doctors" that it is trying to form. Topics such as scope of practice issues should be left for the discussion forums where both sides can be heard. Articles should represent unbiased views from practitioners who are open to the community that SDN is trying to build.

How would OMDs feel if an OD was on the front page saying that OMDs shouldn't refract purely because they don't have the training or expert instruction in the art of refraction that an OD has? Those comments should be reserved for discussion or opinion piece, not an article exploring practice modalities/specialties.

 

[qwopty99]

i don't know what the purpose of the interview was, or how broadly it was disseminated.

that said, she was asked a question by SDN and she gave her reply.

(if she said she supported OD surgical rights? should THAT be censored too? i guess ur answer is yes, but she answered the question she was asked)

if i was the interviewee and found out my interview was censored, i think i would feel upset and justifiably so. to be fair, either:

1. show the entire interview content in entirety.
2. if there is anything "controversial", then delete the interview in entirety on those grounds.
3. if they choose to "censor" anything, it should be explicitly said that parts were removed.

cause now her remaining comments are now, arguably, out of context.

 

[rpames]

Articles should represent unbiased views from practitioners who are open to the community that SDN is trying to build.

As a soon to be OD, 14 days actually, I have strong opinions about this topic. But, I also feel this was an interview asking the Dr. her OPINIONS. With that said, anything that came out of her mouth should be posted...1st amendment rights.

 

[IndianaOD]

As a soon to be OD, 14 days actually, I have strong opinions about this topic. But, I also feel this was an interview asking the Dr. her OPINIONS. With that said, anything that came out of her mouth should be posted...1st amendment rights.

The only way I would agree to this was if there was an OD on the front page the next week allowed to discuss the problems facing optometry, a huge one being militant OMDs and thier unfounded attacks.

If a 3 year residency was set up to allow ODs to become surgeons, as in endodontics (and other dental specialists) and podiatry the point would be moot. I doubt many ODs would choose that route, but it would help end the discrimination. (That would be what.., 7 years of eye directed education vs 3?)

 

[hfpepperbean47]

The argument will never end. Wah wah wah is all I hear on both sides.

 

[ODduck]

As a person who is entering Optometry school, I am quite discouraged by this.

I feel the same way fonz. I am entering OD school in August and it is just downright discouraging that people with an attitude like that are what we have to "look forward" to working with.

 

[luckyfool]

I feel the same way fonz. I am entering OD school in August and it is just downright discouraging that people with an attitude like that are what we have to "look forward" to working with.

One OMD with the attitude doesn't mean all OMDs are the same. Some of them actually like to work with ODs, believe it or not.

 

[cpw]

One OMD with the attitude doesn't mean all OMDs are the same. Some of them actually like to work with ODs, believe it or not.

almost all of the OMDs in my area have ODs on staff. Not all of them of course, but a solid majority.

It's not all as doom and gloom as the forums make it out to be, fortunately. The people on the forums are the ones who are the most passionate about what they do. Why else would they be here ? With that passion, comes heated debate.

 

[alohaknight1]

almost all of the OMDs in my area have ODs on staff. Not all of them of course, but a solid majority.

It's not all as doom and gloom as the forums make it out to be, fortunately. The people on the forums are the ones who are the most passionate about what they do. Why else would they be here ? With that passion, comes heated debate.

Well said.

 

[fjpod]

One OMD with the attitude doesn't mean all OMDs are the same. Some of them actually like to work with ODs, believe it or not.

Sorry to be discouraging about this, but trust me...99.9% of them are the same. Just because they hire you, just because they let you work in their practice, just because they promise you your patient back...they will stab you in the back in a flash. As long as they have you under their thumb, you're ok. The minute you try to practice independantly, they turn on you.

That being said, I think optometry has a promising future and I enjoy every minute of it. You do need to develop a working relationship...preferably with a referral center type of eyecare practice...one that does not provide any primary care.