States where it's illegal for nurses to be called DOCTOR (Take action now!)

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

Would you volunteer to contact your state representatives?

  • Yes, I'd like for it to be illegal in my state as well for DNPs to be called doctors

    Votes: 171 85.1%
  • No, I will just continue to B!&# online and not take any real action.

    Votes: 17 8.5%
  • I have no idea what this is all about :-@

    Votes: 13 6.5%

  • Total voters
    201
What has become of this? I think it's important that this continues! I know this thread is old and kinda disintegrated into back-and-forth arguments. I would love to see this getting stronger and more organized as a movement.

I don't think there is one way to approach this. I don't think you can be too nit-picky. I see this as the way that anti-abortion activists are gaining ground. In addition to attack abortion practice as a whole, they also go after smaller seemingly meaningless or seemingly benign things -- hallways have to be a certain width, women have to go to 2 visits first, women have to give consent a certain number of hours in advanced, having to sit through videos and presentations first -- the end result is that it makes it harder and harder to attain an abortion.



Fighting their calling themselves "doctor" is pretty meaningless if they are only going to turn around and call themselves "board certified dermatologist" (see other thread). While I don't disagree with what you are doing, you are nit-picking. The title isn't as important as the "unauthorized practice of medicine (or dermatology, etc) without a license". The use of "doctor" and "dermatologist" and "board certified" is really a false advertising/creating consumer confusion issue. The real issue is that they are using these titles to set up shops and practice independently as physicians.

Law2Doc,

I'll use another user's response to explain why I think trying to restric the DNPs ability to practice independently is a lost cause:







I think we need to

1) restrict the use of the title "doctor" for patient safety.

2) Define "the practice of medicine" and bring the practice of independent DNPs under the board of medicine.

3) Set rules like the ones in florida where there is "Truth in medical education" by which all practitioners must disclose the actual nature of the education and license they posess.

4) Limit by law, like it's done in Florida, the use of "specialist", "dermatologist", etc to those who have completed an actual residency in an institution recognized by the board of medicine.

I'm currently tweaking another user's sample letter so that it can be used at the state level to request all these changes I just enumerated.


Best regards!

I would be the first in line to vote for a bill enforcing a law that ALL people in contact with a patient, whether its the housekeeper or the chief of surgery, needs to identify themself and what thier title is. Some hospitals have tags that hang under the employee ID that say in big red letters, RN, resident MD, attending MD, NP, PA, CNA, and even environmental service. Nobody has Dr. Jane Smith on their ID, it says Jane Smith MD. If a person such as a social worker or physicial therapist holds a phD, it will have the degree behind their name but it will not say Dr. before their name either.

NOBODY except MD's should be allowed to identify themself as a doctor to patients. I know this is about DNP's, but patients become confused when there is so many people, and there are situations such as the physical therapist and PM+R docs who are both "doctor" that can cause confusion. To the patient, they both deal with rehab, they must be the same right? How about the social worker who holds a doctorate vs. the psychiatrist? To the patient, they both come to see them and talk about things, they don't know the difference if they are both introduced as doctor.

Nurses were able to pass laws making it illegal for anyone but a licensed nurse to be call themself "nurse" to a patient. It would be pretty hypocritical for DNP's especially to try to trick patients into thinking they are physicians or to give the patient the impression that they have equal training by addressing themself as doctor in a clinical setting.

Members don't see this ad.
 
wow nurses acting as independent medical professionals with their own practice making the kind of money physicians make is insanity.... don't these people need to be under physician supervision for all of the decisions they make?? The public needs to be educated, I know myself for one, would NEVER be treated by anything less than a physician for a serious ailment, and ESPECIALLY wouldn't want a nurse controlling my anesthesia during surgery. Its seriously insane. The public needs to be educated about this farce and you docs need to step up and do something about this
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I believe this is the most effective and trascendental way to do something against the current potential degrading of our profession.

Since there are so many "Doctors" already, why don't we just make it a requirement that you put "Physician" on your name tag? That way your little tiny ego won't be slammed so far down.
 
Since there are so many "Doctors" already, why don't we just make it a requirement that you put "Physician" on your name tag? That way your little tiny ego won't be slammed so far down.

Yeah, I think quite a few hospitals are starting to move toward this system - with titles on the badges and "physician" identifying the DO/MDs.
 
Yeah, I think quite a few hospitals are starting to move toward this system - with titles on the badges and "physician" identifying the DO/MDs.
That would make a lot more sense since everyone wears a white coat and is called doctor; the word is so generic now and applies to a lot of fields. "Physician" should be reserved for MD/DO.
 
"Physician" should be reserved for MD/DO.

Agreed ... but it's not. I've had heated discussions with various different individuals who believe, DPMs, ODs, DCs, etc, are all "physicians."

I think I'm going to start arguing the opposite ...

If an optometrist, for example, can call themselves a physician, then a DO/MD should be able to call themselves an optometrist. No???
 
That would make a lot more sense since everyone wears a white coat and is called doctor; the word is so generic now and applies to a lot of fields. "Physician" should be reserved for MD/DO.
THATS the problem though. Everyone wears the white coat and so they are all referred to as 'doctor' by the patient. I know most of the patients have no clue who is coming in and out of their room because there are so many people. Most can't even keep all their physicians straight. I think that to fix this we should:

1. Only medical school trained physicians should be allowed to use the term 'doctor' in a clinical setting. Outside the hospital, I don't care what you call yourself.
2. You should have to properly introduce yourself.
3. Long white coats should only be worn by doctors (see number 1.). If you feel the need to wear a lab coat it should be short like the med students, or it should be a different color. The long white lab coat is associated in our society with physicians as much as the term doctor.

I agree with one of the earlier comments about everyone being able to call themselves doctor makes it seem kind of belittling to our profession, every thing we put up with, etc. Is it prestige? Yes. I've spent many years of my young life in school, taken countless exams, spent more time late at night studying and more sleepless nights than most people in a life time and I'm not done yet. I still have 3-4 years of residency ahead of me.

It is very demanding both physically and mentally to be a physician. But with it comes a great honor and priviledge to care for patients. If you want this prestige then with it you get the loans, the lifestyle and all the responsibilities. You pay your own malpractice so you can get sued for ridiculous issues like we are always worried about. You take full responsibility for your patients and give them the best care possible. This means going to medical school and learning about presentations, physiology and proper treatment using EBM to guide your practice. Nursing cirriculums don't do this well enough. I've encountered far too many NPs 'practicing' on their own who are making improper choices for their patients and actually causing more harm.

If you want to fly the airplane, go to fly the airplane school. Not ground crew or flight attendant school. NPs and PAs are vitally important to the primary care team and administering healthcare. They just don't know enough to do it on their own.

Just my $0.02.
 
I think this is somewhat pointless as 'doctor' references anyone with a doctorate degree - as previous posters have mentioned.

Medical Doctors and DO's are physicians.

Obviously I realize 'lay' patients don't get the difference, but if we start calling ourselves physicians - we're safe forever - as no one else with a 'doctorate' can be a physician.

Also, chiropractors are absolute hacks. Can any chiropractor definitive tell me what 'chiropractic subluxation' is? Reminds me of phrenology IMO

Also, get over the whole 'doctor' title thing. If nurses get a doctorate they can be called doctors - just like any other PhD Jane Doe. However, if they intentionally omit to patients that they aren't technically medical doctors, then that type of deception is inexcusable and should not be tolerated.

In other words, medical facilities should put them in their place, not state legislation - because THEY ARE DOCTORS!!!!
 
Last edited:
This is interesting to see...I was hoping (and expecting) to find a thread like this here. Of course there are several of these on allnurses.com (nurse forums)...I just got involved with the debate because I think it's really whiny and stupid that nurses demand to be called doctor. Several of them made the point that "doctor" just means you have your doctorate, and since (regardless of the setting or what the doctorate is in) you've worked really hard to get it, you should be able to use the title. They also think not being able to use it is a way for ACTUAL doctors (MD/DO) to maintain superiority over nurses. I made the point that as long as they continue to gripe about their title in the clinical setting as opposed to maintaining high performance standards, they will never get the respect they claim to want from anyone. Making a big deal over a freakin' title just makes them look insecure and petty. I think in an educational setting, the title can be used. But clinical settings? That's a load of crap. It's also very apparent to me that nurses want to have more and more of the same duties/responsibilities as doctors without the schooling required. Which is a load of crap.

I'm 2 months into my first year of nursing school (ADN), for some background. I am biased, though, because I'm miserable. I'm strongly considering going to premed after graduating, because my BS meter is on overload.
 
The whole DNP phenomenon is a slap in the face to people who have actually worked to earn their doctorate. Has anyone actually seen the curricula for these programs? They take courses in "leadership" and "social justice", it really has no clinical correlation whatsoever. It would take a medical student about 3 months to fly through some of these programs (most of which are online, lol).

Out of all the doctorates out there, the DNP is probably the easiest one to earn. The way that these noctors demand this kind of respect without actually earning it is a shame. I think they've flown under the radar because the older generation of doctors really doesn't realize how poorly trained these DNPs are; IMO, most of today's current graduates understand how little the nurses know and really have no respect for them...this whole thing has just brought to attention how little intelligence is required to earn the DNP.
 
The whole DNP phenomenon is a slap in the face to people who have actually worked to earn their doctorate. Has anyone actually seen the curricula for these programs? They take courses in "leadership" and "social justice", it really has no clinical correlation whatsoever. It would take a medical student about 3 months to fly through some of these programs (most of which are online, lol).

Out of all the doctorates out there, the DNP is probably the easiest one to earn. The way that these noctors demand this kind of respect without actually earning it is a shame. I think they've flown under the radar because the older generation of doctors really doesn't realize how poorly trained these DNPs are; IMO, most of today's current graduates understand how little the nurses know and really have no respect for them...this whole thing has just brought to attention how little intelligence is required to earn the DNP.

Hehe, "noctors"...I like that. :D I talked with my dad about it today...initially he said "why not let them use the term 'doctor?'" I brought up this exact point about education. After 2 months of nursing school, I honestly never want to see a nurse practitioner again. The level of scientific understanding stopped after my professors' prerequisite A&P courses. They don't have a clue why anything happens and claim (sorry, I keep repeating this because it literally shocks me that anyone would fall back on such a lame excuse so much) it's "outside the scope of nursing practice." Yet they still believe they are entitled to be called "doctor." That's a load of manure.

Nurses also gripe about doctors not wanting DNP's to use the title because doctors want to continue suppressing nurses, as they have done throughout history. It's a good thing the debate is through internet forums, because I would have been ready to strangle them (I've been having this same debate on allnurses.com...I'm really pissing people off over there, lol). I've made the point numerous times that focusing on getting a certain title isn't going to make them any more respected by doctors, patients, other healthcare team members, etc. And that making this out to be a huge issue only makes nurses look bad. NOT doctors.

Maybe I'm the only nursing student who sees through this idiotic crap, dunno. But nurses are nurses and doctors are doctors. Nurses need to get over whatever inferiority complex they have and focus on proving themselves in their actions rather than these fancy notions.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
According to the Pearson report - there are currently 7 states [Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Oregon] which have statutes or regulations prohibiting a nurse practitioner (NP) or other doctorally prepared health professional from using the title "Doctor.[1]

Florida makes the practitioner display the actual tranining/license they work under in visible badges.

Now it is at the state level that we need to be focusing our efforts.

We need to start contacting our state representatives on a "regular" basis so that the same legislation of these seven states also takes place in every other state of the union and even in Puerto Rico, yes sir!

I personally volunteer to do precisely this in my state (Florida)

Who will volunteer to contact their representatives in their own states?

(IT'S EASY I CAN SHOW YOU HOW!)


Would you follow me in ceasing to only whine about your frustrations online and actually taking actions to protect patients and medicine in general?


1.Pearson L. The Pearson Report. Am J Nurs Pract. 2007;11:2.

Be more concerned with non-physicians introducing themselves as doctor OUTSIDE OF A HEALTHCARE SETTING. This is extremely unorthodox. Doctorate holders traditionally only use the doctor title when their expertise is actually being used in a situation. Medical doctors are only an exception because they are the most qualified to treat the widest variety of emergency
medical situations. If someone has a heart attack in a restaurant, it's the MD you want treating the patient first; at least for now.


So let me get this straight, you've been spending at least 10 years of your life to prepare yourself for the practice of medicine, currently work probably about 80 hours a week on the job, perhaps work another 20 hours off of the job reviewing and practicing, and are fully dedicated to the treatment of patients, but your major concern is the title someone uses in an allied profession?

First of all, many NP are highly trained and extremely well educated. The best NP is better educated regarding diagnosing some ailments than an average physician. There should be more exams open to NP, PA, and physicians to allow individuals from allied professions to show just what they know regarding aspects of healthcare; let titles and possibly some scope of practice adjustments be made on the basis of those exams. Since the doctor title refers to knowledge, how is it fair to judge an individual's perspicacity solely on their degree? Vivien Thomas pioneered open heart surgery without a doctorate of any kind so JHU awarded him an honorary Doctor of Law degree SPECIFICALLY TO ALLOW MEDICAL STUDENTS TO CALL HIM DOCTOR. Krishna Shenoy is a major pioneer of deep brain stimulation and did not have a medical degree: do you think he shouldn't be allowed to use a title in a medical setting that respects his contributions to medicine?

Since non-physicians often have a lot of thorough training in healthcare, a solid case could be made that banning the use of the title would result in patients losing confidence in some of the most qualified individuals for part of their healthcare needs.

There exists a perfect solution to this problem. Rather than restrict free-speech to stamp out what might only vaguely be perceived as implicit fraud, allow the hospitals to set their own policies regarding how individuals should address themselves. If the patient doesn't understand the difference between 'doctor' and physician, educate him on the subject.

Rather than improving patient care, your proposal seems to be based on extreme insecurity that takes time away from perfecting healthcare for the purposes of promoting a guild-war. I'm a pharmacy student, and when I caught an aspirin-methotrexate interaction at work and I told the pharmacist. She was simply ignored because the patient thought pharmacists and their students were just overpaid parasites that didn't have the drug knowledge of a physician. She ended up witholding the script until she convinced the physician to call her and tell her that.

I'm actually against non-physicians introducing themselves as doctor except in certain circumstances, but the healthcare knowledge that non-physicians often have needs to be respected. Most physicians agree, but a vocal minority that comprises some of the AMA apparently disagrees, despite their advice making our health care costs significantly higher than those of others countries with a lower life-expectancy to boot.
 
Hehe, "noctors"...I like that. :D I talked with my dad about it today...initially he said "why not let them use the term 'doctor?'" I brought up this exact point about education. After 2 months of nursing school, I honestly never want to see a nurse practitioner again. The level of scientific understanding stopped after my professors' prerequisite A&P courses. They don't have a clue why anything happens and claim (sorry, I keep repeating this because it literally shocks me that anyone would fall back on such a lame excuse so much) it's "outside the scope of nursing practice." Yet they still believe they are entitled to be called "doctor." That's a load of manure.

That's a great criticism of individual NP, but it'd be somewhat prejudiced to apply that to all NP. I know an NP who has done critical research in determining the specific roles of ion-channel activity involved in epilepsy, and I know another who holds several widely used patents for ergonomic medical testing.

Plus, a lot of physicians, especially GP, don't retain a solid grasp on anatomy and physiology if it doesn't usually relate to their practice. Either they don't retain what they learn or they don't keep up with the developments. I had bad ulcers one time in high school and the doctor asked me about my stress level a lot. I had learned in biology class that H. pylori was a major cause of ulcers, while the role of stress was unknown. When I asked him about this, he said he didn't know and then went to look it up and confirmed it; this fact changed his prescription. Another time, I was passing my second kidney stone in a month and the doctor recommended cranberry juice, which actually has been shown to increase the risk of calcium oxalate kidney stones despite previously held beliefs. So I wouldn't attack such a benevolent profession; I'd just work to improve it.
 
The whole DNP phenomenon is a slap in the face to people who have actually worked to earn their doctorate. Has anyone actually seen the curricula for these programs? They take courses in "leadership" and "social justice", it really has no clinical correlation whatsoever. It would take a medical student about 3 months to fly through some of these programs (most of which are online, lol).

Out of all the doctorates out there, the DNP is probably the easiest one to earn. The way that these noctors demand this kind of respect without actually earning it is a shame. I think they've flown under the radar because the older generation of doctors really doesn't realize how poorly trained these DNPs are; IMO, most of today's current graduates understand how little the nurses know and really have no respect for them...this whole thing has just brought to attention how little intelligence is required to earn the DNP.

An unwritten rule with medical school is that the applicants must have bachelor's degrees, with only rare exceptions. Therefore, just about every medical student in the US spends two years in undergraduate work taking classes that aren't prerequisite for medical school. Roughly half of these classes have nothing to do with clinical practice either. Very few professional programs of any kind in the US, allow immediate credit by examination so a medical doctor wouldn't be allowed to finish in 3 months; I think it's bologna, but it is the general policy. The same could be said for many medical school classes when prominent Ph.D. holders go to medical school. If what you say is true, than DNP need to be tested more on anatomy/physiology, the hard sciences, and perhaps simply take the many of the same exams medical students take. Is it that unreasonable to provide them the opportunity to gradually expand scope of practice via examination?

Sorry for three posts in a row by the way.
 
Vivien Thomas pioneered open heart surgery without a doctorate of any kind so JHU awarded him an honorary Doctor of Law degree SPECIFICALLY TO ALLOW MEDICAL STUDENTS TO CALL HIM DOCTOR. Krishna Shenoy is a major pioneer of deep brain stimulation and did not have a medical degree: do you think he shouldn't be allowed to use a title in a medical setting that respects his contributions to medicine?

I'm actually against non-physicians introducing themselves as doctor except in certain circumstances, but the healthcare knowledge that non-physicians often have needs to be respected. Most physicians agree, but a vocal minority that comprises some of the AMA apparently disagrees, despite their advice making our health care costs significantly higher than those of others countries with a lower life-expectancy to boot.

I think things are being muddled with contributions to medicine and degree-right. Vivien Thomas was an amazing human being who, through his research, saved millions of lives. How can that be equated with graduating with a DNP 'doctorate'? And Dr. Shenoy (I assume you mean the guy from Stanford that makes those human-computer interfaces) does amazing work, but if he walked into a patient room who had a complaint and said "I'm Dr. Shenoy, let me help you," that would be fraudulent.

I think most of what you throw out is anecdotal, but I would agree that many non-physicians have significant healthcare knowledge. I, nor any attendings I've seen, never bat an eyelash when a patient calls the PA I'm working with 'Doctor.' Just as the pharmacist working with us on transplant rounds gets introduced as 'Doctor.' In the first case, a little blurring of the lines is totally fine for a provider when it is the patient who has initiated the title use as a sign of professional respect. In the latter, a pharmacist is given a doctorate, and are damn good at what they do. My sister dates a pharmacist and I think they are remarkably well educated. In their clinical setting, it is perfectly appropriate to refer to them as such. Now, if said pharmacist walked into clinic and introduced himself as a doctor for a woman with a pus-filled wound, that would be a problem.

That's a great criticism of individual NP, but it'd be somewhat prejudiced to apply that to all NP. I know an NP who has done critical research in determining the specific roles of ion-channel activity involved in epilepsy, and I know another who holds several widely used patents for ergonomic medical testing.
Research skill or contributions do not translate into clinical competency. I know several medical students that have completed PhDs at ivy league institutions elucidated novel pathways in cancer metastasis, genomics, and tissue transfer, published in Cancer Cell, Nature, and Cell. But they were quick how little this applies to the clinical setting.

As for individual physicians not keeping up to date, that's unfortunate, and in any field we'll find top performers, and those that can't treat an ulcer.
 
I think things are being muddled with contributions to medicine and degree-right. Vivien Thomas was an amazing human being who, through his research, saved millions of lives. How can that be equated with graduating with a DNP 'doctorate'?

There are individual DNP who are excellent practitioners without a medical degree. It would not be fair, nor in the patients' interests, to slight them. The Florida law requiring that training be displayed is a good and fair one.

And Dr. Shenoy (I assume you mean the guy from Stanford that makes those human-computer interfaces) does amazing work, but if he walked into a patient room who had a complaint and said "I'm Dr. Shenoy, let me help you," that would be fraudulent.
That's a good point. I don't think a person should use a title unless their expertise is being called upon so using a doctor title in a clinical setting can have false connotations. Medical doctors and D.O.(what's the difference today?) have to be prepared to use their expertise at any given moment which is why they're arguably an exception to the rule. What if there was a problem with a neuroprosthetic though? Situations may arise when patient confidence should be placed in a Ph.D. holder for specific reasons.

I think most of what you throw out is anecdotal, but I would agree that many non-physicians have significant healthcare knowledge.

It is anecdotal, but I have seen some studies supporting what I'm talking about.

Now, if said pharmacist walked into clinic and introduced himself as a doctor for a woman with a pus-filled wound, that would be a problem.

Good point, but how do you instill patient confidence in non-physicians without that?

Research skill or contributions do not translate into clinical competency. I know several medical students that have completed PhDs at ivy league institutions elucidated novel pathways in cancer metastasis, genomics, and tissue transfer, published in Cancer Cell, Nature, and Cell. But they were quick how little this applies to the clinical setting.
That's true, but it would then be an issue of respect of their still immensely relevant knowledge.
[/quote]

As for individual physicians not keeping up to date, that's unfortunate, and in any field we'll find top performers, and those that can't treat an ulcer.
I think aging takes its toll, but the point was that some NP are very good and use of the doctor title might make patients feel appropriately in good hands.
 
EF, I'm glad we can have a real discussion about this, without it erupting into a flame war :)

There are individual DNP who are excellent practitioners without a medical degree. It would not be fair, nor in the patients' interests, to slight them. The Florida law requiring that training be displayed is a good and fair one.
I don't doubt that there are excellent DNPs/NPs, but my point is that excellence in practice or research endeavor does not a degree make, nor a title give. I think training should always be displayed, but as we've been talking about, the doctor of nursing practice is by and large a doctorate... of nursing practice, including epidemiology and nursing management. As it stands, I don't think this translates into usefulness on the wards.

That's a good point. I don't think a person should use a title unless their expertise is being called upon so using a doctor title in a clinical setting can have false connotations. Medical doctors and D.O.(what's the difference today?) have to be prepared to use their expertise at any given moment which is why they're arguably an exception to the rule. What if there was a problem with a neuroprosthetic though? Situations may arise when patient confidence should be placed in a Ph.D. holder for specific reasons.
I would say that MD and DO are basically equivalent, and for purposes of this discussion, I think they should be so. A Ph.D is not a clinical degree. In the rare of rare situation where a Ph.D would need to be consulted for something as esoteric as a neuroprosthetic, I would trust the Ph.D in explaining how it works, but I would always leave it to the neurosurgeons judgment to not kill the patient while it's in. A Ph.D just doesn't have the big picture in mind when dealing with an issue.

Good point, but how do you instill patient confidence in non-physicians without that?
The burden of confidence should be on the provider. And I'd hope that professionals would not resort to title encroachment to prove their competence. It was only 100 year ago that doctors and surgeons were thought of as quacks and butchers. It took decades and an overhaul of medical education, beginning at Hopkins, to change that stereotype.

That's true, but it would then be an issue of respect of their still immensely relevant knowledge.
I'd say you can respect someone just as much outside of the patient room. In the room, the name of the game is letting the patient know who the clinical knowledge lies with.

I think aging takes its toll, but the point was that some NP are very good and use of the doctor title might make patients feel appropriately in good hands.
I think that is the very definition of misrepresentation. If the "best" NP is better than the "worst" MD, with best being 2 standard deviation away from the mean, or the top/bottom 2.5%, it would make it incredibly difficult for patients to discern the credibility of their providers, which by and large will be the remaining 97.5% of health care workers, by calling them the same name purely for the sake of those 2.5%. If that's the case, should the top 2.5% of doctor also be given a different title? As per bad MDs, I wouldn't even attribute it all to aging. Some are just bad, and have no desire to improve on their knowledge or care. No excuses for them.
 
That's a great criticism of individual NP, but it'd be somewhat prejudiced to apply that to all NP. I know an NP who has done critical research in determining the specific roles of ion-channel activity involved in epilepsy, and I know another who holds several widely used patents for ergonomic medical testing.

From my understanding, nurses/NPs/etc will say they have done research on a certain medical science topic, but they are actually part of a group that did the research and their role was not intensely involved in the science. As an example, I saw sleep study researchers interviewed. They had an NP, but she described her duties as speeding up the process for physicians by conducting the initial patient interviews. Whether or not she would refer to it as her research in a social setting/in passing, I don't know. Sometimes situations like that are unintentional (ie, referring to the work of the team as your own). Other times, though, people just fudge the way they say things to make themselves look better than they actually are. I'm sure not all NPs are complete idiots. There are good and bad members of every profession. But after my experience thus far, I really don't want to see an NP in place of my doctor again.

Plus, a lot of physicians, especially GP, don't retain a solid grasp on anatomy and physiology if it doesn't usually relate to their practice.

I'm sure there are physicians that don't retain/keep up with applicable A&P. Again, there are good and bad of every profession. But a physician's understanding and training is generally much more in depth than an NP. In practice and depending on the individual NP/MD, there may be an NP that has much more independent research/study on A&P and/or recent advancements than some MDs. But in terms of how the degree educates them, MDs do technically learn more. And while what I said was a generality, I do think it's pretty accurate in terms of formal education.

So I wouldn't attack such a benevolent profession; I'd just work to improve it.

The problem is several RNs and NPs both are not benevolent. I won't say the profession as a whole isn't benevolent, as that's a generalization that I can't back up with hard evidence/research. I do think it is fair to say there are many nurses and NPs that are not benevolent when it comes to their opinions of MDs. I would imagine there are numerous people on this forum and many more elsewhere that have first hand/personal experience with this. My school may just be exceptional in the professors being obnoxious and judgmental, but my professors have made multiple malicious comments about physicians. Not to mention, students (yes, plural) are already mimicking the same attitude as the professors ("doctors are stupid," "doctors don't know what they're doing," "it's actually nurses that do all the work so doctors don't deserve any credit," etc). They may have had these preconceptions going into the program, but I think it's unhealthy that the faculty reinforces these ideas. I've also gathered this is a more widespread opinion based on perusing allnurses.com and this push for DNPs to use the title "doctor." Maybe (hopefully?) it's not as bad as it appears (it's easy to find negative opinions online and the media doesn't portray things accurately), but I don't the nursing profession is as benevolent as it may be perceived.

EF, I'm glad we can have a real discussion about this, without it erupting into a flame war :)

Lol. I guess this is one case that duplicate threads is beneficial. ;) Eagleface has definitely made some interesting points without being too emotional (I'm saying this tongue in cheek, because I know I've been horrible with calmly/rationally discussing my opinion on the matter).

I don't doubt that there are excellent DNPs/NPs, but my point is that excellence in practice or research endeavor does not a degree make, nor a title give. I think training should always be displayed, but as we've been talking about, the doctor of nursing practice is by and large a doctorate... of nursing practice, including epidemiology and nursing management. As it stands, I don't think this translates into usefulness on the wards.

I think that is the very definition of misrepresentation. If the "best" NP is better than the "worst" MD, with best being 2 standard deviation away from the mean, or the top/bottom 2.5%, it would make it incredibly difficult for patients to discern the credibility of their providers, which by and large will be the remaining 97.5% of health care workers, by calling them the same name purely for the sake of those 2.5%. If that's the case, should the top 2.5% of doctor also be given a different title? As per bad MDs, I wouldn't even attribute it all to aging. Some are just bad, and have no desire to improve on their knowledge or care. No excuses for them.

These are two very good arguments. In the end, a nurse practitioner is still a nurse. This means that regardless of the education level, the NP still follows the scope of practice of a nurse. Coursework at the doctorate level will still be nursing coursework that stays within the nursing scope of practice, regardless of which way you slice it. Likewise, the MD will always follow the scope of practice of a medical DOCTOR. And perhaps there are some DNPs that are better than MDs. In the end, however, DNPs cannot perform the identical function, to the same degree/level, as an MD in any (I say any as NPs in the end answer to MDs) or all healthcare settings.

A lot of the threads regarding this topic on allnurses.com make it a matter of semantics. Many reason that the title "doctor" initially referred to anyone with a doctorate level degree rather than a physician. I have seen many vengeful posts attempting to argue that physicians cannot hold claim of this title for that very reason. A few have gone as far as stating that because not all physicians hold PhDs, many should not be allowed to use the title at all. At the same time, they contradict themselves (though some do in farce) by saying we should not be bound to tradition (where is a dancing Jew smiley when you need one?). I bring this up because I'm curious to see the opinions/arguments for/against the semantics here. Honestly, I'm not even sure what they say is true (I don't care to research it and to really get down to the bottom of this history may be time consuming...honestly I want to doubt this statement, especially since no resources to back it up were given that I could find), but in the chance/alternate universe that it WERE true, bringing up the evolution of language/linguistics research could be quite fun (I'm a word-nerd). Especially if it stumps people believing this is a valid argument.

If what you say is true, than DNP need to be tested more on anatomy/physiology, the hard sciences, and perhaps simply take the many of the same exams medical students take. Is it that unreasonable to provide them the opportunity to gradually expand scope of practice via examination?

I 100% agree with this. Especially in order to use the title "doctor." I think nursing education is in general very disjointed and unorganized (though this is primarily based on my experience, the small bits of history our teachers "taught" us didn't point to it ever being any other way). I also think if nurses have any kind of larger responsibility of taking care of patients that online education programs are completely inappropriate. I went to a seminar, I guess you would say, of a university advertising their RN to BSN to MSN program. It could be completed in its entirety online. Furthermore, the presenters stated that you could not fail. The only way to not get the degree would be by cutting off all contact with the professor/not completing any work and/or dropping out. That's honestly kind of frightening to think that people who are simply passed through a BSN/MSN program just because they are present/do the work, regardless of the quality, have these degrees. Not all programs are this way, I know, but there are more than enough to greatly concern me.

I don't argue against allowing the opportunity to expand the scope of practice by any means. I think this SHOULD happen, especially given the population that (appears to) believes they are equivalent to an MD. Right now I'm actually annoyed with this stupid "scope of practice" crap, because while my professors want to be respected as equal to MDs, they claim they can't answer my questions because they are outside the nursing scope of practice. In other words, they are basically picking and choosing when/when not to use this "scope" to their personal advantage. That is manipulative and puts a bad face on the profession.
 
I don't argue against allowing the opportunity to expand the scope of practice by any means. I think this SHOULD happen, especially given the population that (appears to) believes they are equivalent to an MD. Right now I'm actually annoyed with this stupid "scope of practice" crap, because while my professors want to be respected as equal to MDs, they claim they can't answer my questions because they are outside the nursing scope of practice. In other words, they are basically picking and choosing when/when not to use this "scope" to their personal advantage. That is manipulative and puts a bad face on the profession.

:thumbup:
 
I'm wary of punishing NPs and RN for the use of a title (very nearly encroaches on first amendment right). I'm much more interested in preventing unauthorized practice of medicine which every state has a law against. I agree that allowing usage of the title may encourage unauthorized practice, nevertheless it is the danger of poor treatment rather than the self-aggrandizing that people really want to police. People are generally very good about avoiding tackiness and using appropriate titles. As a law student, I'd never refer to myself as Dr. so-and-so (unless in an academic setting in which it is prudent).

If there is such a thing as a doctoral-level degree in nursing, I have no problem with the use of the title.

As far as the history of the word is concerned, it's a derivative of Latin for 'I teach.' The first academic titles were given to lawyers and called doctorates in the 11th century. The practice of calling medical men doctor didn't emerge until the 13th century. The title was primarily academic, but because of the volume of interaction between average people and medical professionals, the title became widely associated with the practice of medicine.
 
I believe some states now have mandatory, color-coded, identification badges for different levels of health care practitioners. Why not just make this federal law? An ID badge with the word NURSE written loud and clear in big bold letters should do the trick. No tiny little hidden letters. I'm talking ID badges like the name tags you had on your desk in kindergarten (well, not that big). PHYSICIAN. NURSE. NURSE PRACTITIONER. PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT. CUSTODIAN. :)

Sure, call yourself "doctor" but your patient will be sure to see that NURSE tag, and I'm sure some questions will follow.

The whole scope of practice thing is a much scarier issue though. I'm no fan of big government, but it needs to step in here. No medical school, no practice medicine without physicians' supervision. Plain and simple. When will the AMA/AOA, state medical boards, whatever, step up and start making some noise about this? (Or have they already?) When will these NP diploma mills be shut down? When will this online-degree nonsense come to an end?

When will people learn to just accept their role in the system and play said part without trying to cross boundaries into territories that have yet to earn the right to step into?
 
Last edited:
I believe some states now have mandatory, color-coded, identification badges for different levels of health care practitioners. Why not just make this federal law? An ID badge with the word NURSE written loud and clear in big bold letters should do the trick. No tiny little hidden letters. I'm talking ID badges like the name tags you had on your desk in kindergarten (well, not that big). PHYSICIAN. NURSE. NURSE PRACTITIONER. PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT. CUSTODIAN. :)

Sure, call yourself "doctor" but your patient will be sure to see that NURSE tag, and I'm sure some questions will follow.

The whole scope of practice thing is a much scarier issue though. I'm no fan of big government, but it needs to step in here. No medical school, no practice medicine without physicians' supervision. Plain and simple. When will the AMA/AOA, state medical boards, whatever, step up and start making some noise about this? (Or have they already?) When will these NP diploma mills be shut down? When will this online-degree nonsense come to an end?

When will people learn to just accept their role in the system and play said part without trying to cross boundaries into territories that have yet to earn the right to step into?

When will idiots that have no clue about the benefits of distance education ever catch on? That's what I wonder!

Why not just sue patients? I've been called "doctor" since 1970 when I was a nurse's aide. I still introduce myself as a nurse practitioner and 99% of the time the response is, "How you doing doctor?" Get some therapy for your problem. You're beating your pointy head against a wall that won't be moving anytime soon...get a helmet.
 
When will idiots that have no clue about the benefits of distance education ever catch on? That's what I wonder!

Why not just sue patients? I've been called "doctor" since 1970 when I was a nurse's aide. I still introduce myself as a nurse practitioner and 99% of the time the response is, "How you doing doctor?" Get some therapy for your problem. You're beating your pointy head against a wall that won't be moving anytime soon...get a helmet.

Intelligent response. Thank you.
 
Top