There are currently 21 Optometry schools in the USA and another one on the way of opening up. Ques

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

hello07

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
389
Reaction score
19
Why is the American Optometric Association and all the leaders of our wonderful profession allowing this to happen ? There was once 16 US Optometry schools and competition was fierce back in the days of gaining admission. Currently, there are 21 schools with another one opening up bringing the total to 22. With all these schools opening up, staggering tuition, increase class size in many private schools along with stagnant salaries for ODs across the board, saturation of ODs and OMDs in big cities why are the forefront leaders allowing this to happen ? Can the AOA put a stop to this ?

Anyone care to answer?
Thank you in advance.
 
As the population ages there will be increased demand for eye doctors as people's vision decline as they age. I'm assuming the AOA would rather err on the side of having more optometrists than they need rather than not enough.
 
Can the AOA put a stop to this ?
Thank you in advance.

My guess is no, they can't. It seems like the ASCO should be able to though. It troubles me that the AOA denies the problem even exists, and the aging population theory is ridiculous.
 
My guess is no, they can't. It seems like the ASCO should be able to though. It troubles me that the AOA denies the problem even exists, and the aging population theory is ridiculous.
How is the aging population theory ridiculous?
 
How is the aging population theory ridiculous?

Ridiculous. 1000000%
That's the AOA's bull**** go-to statement for endorsing the profession.
Baby boomers are NOT just approaching age 40.
Presbyopia is what drives patients (after a long gap or first) to see an optometrist.
Baby boomers are hitting 50s-70s, so they already have their eyecare needs established and addressed.

The generation that is on the rise are millennials. You know, the generation that does everything online.

Edit: I get to, once again, link to the AOA's manpower study: http://optometrytimes.modernmedicin...ometric-association/optometric-manpower-study
(I just want every single pre-opt student to read the study...and I always have to add that I love my job but hate blissful ignorance)

"According to the study, there appears to be an 'adequate' supply of eye doctors, optometrists and ophthalmologists (the latter new to this study), including projections of new doctors, to meet current and projected demand for eyecare services through 2025."
...without the opening of new schools
 
Last edited:
How is the aging population theory ridiculous?

OpticalBlackOut explained it well. The baby boomers are already in the pool, and even if there were somehow a magic surge of new patients, it would not warrant the opening of a single new Optometry School. There is nothing magic about a large population turning 60.
 
When I went to my interview at the new school in Pikeville, Kentucky, KYCO mentioned the following:
Between Lexington, KY and Pikeville, KY there were only TWO OMDs and about 10 ODs. This was the driving factor in opening a new school in that location, due to under service. I agree, there are places that are overly saturated, however even in a state where there is a broad scope of practice for optometrists such as Kentucky, there are very few optometrists in rural areas.
 
When I went to my interview at the new school in Pikeville, Kentucky, KYCO mentioned the following:
Between Lexington, KY and Pikeville, KY there were only TWO OMDs and about 10 ODs. This was the driving factor in opening a new school in that location, due to under service. I agree, there are places that are overly saturated, however even in a state where there is a broad scope of practice for optometrists such as Kentucky, there are very few optometrists in rural areas.

10 ODs for how many people? It's true that oversupply is geographical, but even a relatively underserved rural area is a poor excuse for a new school.
 
10 ODs for how many people? It's true that oversupply is geographical, but even a relatively underserved rural area is a poor excuse for a new school.
They didn't quite say, but when I looked it up, in Pike County there is a population of around 64K. I feel that this is small yes, but a lot of people from neighboring states will be looking for this school to produce more ODs. From my own personal experience in my family, my mother who is an MD chose to practice in a rural setting and makes significantly more than those in oversaturated areas. I think ODs who tend to markets that are underserved is the main reason this school is opening. Personally, wherever I choose to go to school is where I would probably settle down after as well, hence why states with a long history of producing optometrists naturally have more over saturation.
 
64k people for 10 ODs is nowhere near underserved. It could be that the population is larger, but the problem is that a new Optometry school will be pumping out graduates indefinitely. I sincerely doubt anyone in the mainland US is more than a 45 minute drive from the nearest OD. I would be happy to find out that this is not the case, but either way, the rural areas will be filled in eventually. Universities start Optometry schools to make money, not to service local areas.
 
I'm a visitor from the dental forums, but I think that what is happening is happening across the board in every profession.

The government has been pouring unlimited money into higher education for decades now. The is no underwriting of student loans, no checking it against employment prospects, etc. Anyone who wants to go, can go, and they can just borrow unlimited money to do so. This creates an irresistible temptation amongst the schools to grow...whether to increase class sizes or to open a new school entirely. Of course this leads to saturation and underqualified students entering the profession, but the schools are making such a killing that they just don't care, or they find ways to rationalize it--saying things like they are in partnership with the government, "creating opportunity" for people to earn professional degrees.

The thing is, the "optometry pie" is only so big. Opening more schools and cranking out more optometrists does not enlarge that pie; it merely causes the existing pie to be divided into ever smaller pieces.

As bad as it is in optometry, it is much, much worse in law. Google the law school scam for details. What is happening in law is happening to all professional schools and to all of higher education generally. But nowhere is it as bad as in law. I think this is for two reasons:

1) all you need to open a law school is four walls and some books. No expensive lab equipment, no cadavers, no resource which is fundamentally subject to hard limitations of any sort. As long as the money keeps pouring in, they can build more schools and enlarge existing ones.

2) entry into the profession is not dependent on grades in "hard science" classes. At some level, even with all the inflation taking place, they still expect to accept only people with high grades. In the medical professions, the population of students with high grades in the necessary prerequisites, like the lab equipment and cadavers, is subject to something of a hard limitation. You can't just mint more A students in physics or chemistry. You can, however, mint just about as many "A" students as you want in "women's studies" or "concepts in art". This leads to a large surplus of people from such departments with "high" GPAs who consequently think they are smart and who think professional school is a good idea. Combine that with a government-backed student loan system which will give them all the unlimited money they want to pursue higher education, and combine that with a profession which requires very little overhead to open a school, and you have a malthusian ****ing catastrophe. And that is precisely what has happened in law.

Optometrists, take solace...you complain about "only" finding employment at 60k/year...fresh law school graduates--the LUCKY ones--are able to find 35k/year jobs working 70 hours a week in a doc review dungeon...all while trying to manage 150k+ of non-dischargeable debt.

Government subsidy of higher education needs to stop.
 
When I went to my interview at the new school in Pikeville, Kentucky, KYCO mentioned the following:
Between Lexington, KY and Pikeville, KY there were only TWO OMDs and about 10 ODs. This was the driving factor in opening a new school in that location, due to under service. I agree, there are places that are overly saturated, however even in a state where there is a broad scope of practice for optometrists such as Kentucky, there are very few optometrists in rural areas.

What steps, if any is the school taking to ensure that students admitted to their program will practice in that area? How many ODs do they need for that area? Are they planning on shutting the school down once an "acceptable" level of ODs in that area has?

har har har
 
What steps, if any is the school taking to ensure that students admitted to their program will practice in that area? How many ODs do they need for that area? Are they planning on shutting the school down once an "acceptable" level of ODs in that area has?
har har har
The San Antonio school used the same flawed reasoning. Underserved areas along the Texas-Mexico border.
Almost none of their graduates have gone to those areas.
 
Top