If everyone is practicing the same thing i.e. AP/CP, what is the justification in having candidates afer 2006 take the re-certification while exempting all the older graduates (who would probably benefit more from the re-certification).
Time limited certification :Justification for exemption prior to 2006
- Thread starter raider
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
It is called a grandfather clause.
Previously people were boarded for life. When the ABP decided to change the rules, they couldn't unboard the previously boarded people.
All the medical specialties have moved in this direction. It is just the way of the world. Just like having to document CME, it is not enough to have gone through medical school and residency; you have to continue being educated and document it.
Passing a recertification exam is all part of the same thing. I expect it to be easy relative to the primary board. If you are a general pathologist at an academic center or private practice, you'll probably not even have to study. The only people that might have trouble are people that work at reference labs signing out solely GI or Derm, people in private practice that say only work on heme for a group, and people in subspecialized academic centers who only sign out 1-2 organ systems for their careers. The board will have to figure out how to tweek the system so those people aren't having to relearn things they haven't seen in nearly a decade.
Previously people were boarded for life. When the ABP decided to change the rules, they couldn't unboard the previously boarded people.
All the medical specialties have moved in this direction. It is just the way of the world. Just like having to document CME, it is not enough to have gone through medical school and residency; you have to continue being educated and document it.
Passing a recertification exam is all part of the same thing. I expect it to be easy relative to the primary board. If you are a general pathologist at an academic center or private practice, you'll probably not even have to study. The only people that might have trouble are people that work at reference labs signing out solely GI or Derm, people in private practice that say only work on heme for a group, and people in subspecialized academic centers who only sign out 1-2 organ systems for their careers. The board will have to figure out how to tweek the system so those people aren't having to relearn things they haven't seen in nearly a decade.
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2004
- Messages
- 330
- Reaction score
- 27
I would like to think that the ABP would make an exam like that. Unfortunately, I have this bad feeling that the ABP will make everyone just take the same exam that the primary certifiers are taking. Why? Because that requires the least effort. There isn't exactly any incentive for the ABP to be efficient or responsive to its diplomates. What are you going to do, form a rival certifiying agency?
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
^^^^^then I am going to start an on-line pathology board review course.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 2,151
- Reaction score
- 5
Not everyone is practicing AP/CP
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 28,059
- Reaction score
- 441
Older pathologists aren't going to agree to recertification and they make the rules.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2004
- Messages
- 7,132
- Reaction score
- 1,255
Yep, basically they would have to offer re-certs for grandfathered board cert people for free. They couldnt charge for it or risk a civil suit. Im sure if they could get away with yanking grandfathered certs out they would have.
If they did ever decide to revoke lifetime certs, I would simply call up my legal people and get to work. The ABP would be bankrupt from all the legal action within weeks.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
Sure it is. They changed the rules and said it applies from this day forth.
The NBME added the step 2CS and said it applies from 2005 on.
It is just the way it goes, and one should just sack up and not cry about it.
I'm just worried about people like me. I don't want to do general. I want to subspecialize and only sign-out what I specialize in. People like me will have to figure out how to keep up on ovarian tumors and **** that we never ever see after residency.
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2007
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 0
I sure hope it doesn't work out that way. Our class and the class ahead of us already had to spend $1300 or more on taking the step 2 CS...*gag* there goes more hard earned loan money. If it does go through I hope it pertains to people after our class.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 28,059
- Reaction score
- 441
Well, at the USCAP forum last year, the ABP director said that there are thoughts in mind that the re-cert examinations may not be the same for everyone. That is, for people who are pure subspecialists it may be tailored for them (the main worry was from forensic pathologists, I think). I am not sure about this or if this is even feasible though. I am sure there are subspecialists who then change jobs and start signing out new things or take on different responsibilities. The other rumor of course which they didn't really dispute was that the re-cert exams would be "easier" than the original certification.
I agree though if the old guard doesn't have to recertify it really doesn't affect me anyway. The only reasons I can think to force them to do it (from my perspective, anyway) are 1) making sure they really do know what they need to and 2) spite. #1 is a weak reason because any good pathologist in practice is going to have to stay on top of things anyway. #2 is a fun reason but not really practical. However, I do think a lot of things in medicine especially in regards to testing and certification ARE done out of spite.
It stinks that the change is happening before I take the boards, but I don't really have control over that either.
I agree though if the old guard doesn't have to recertify it really doesn't affect me anyway. The only reasons I can think to force them to do it (from my perspective, anyway) are 1) making sure they really do know what they need to and 2) spite. #1 is a weak reason because any good pathologist in practice is going to have to stay on top of things anyway. #2 is a fun reason but not really practical. However, I do think a lot of things in medicine especially in regards to testing and certification ARE done out of spite.
It stinks that the change is happening before I take the boards, but I don't really have control over that either.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2005
- Messages
- 476
- Reaction score
- 10
You have to realize that the future will see even the grandfathered people having to be recertified. Many states are looking this issue and some are already looking at making licensees prove they have taken and recertificication exam if they have been licensed more than 10 years. Also managed care programs will be requiring this in the future....
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
Should we have to take step 1,2,3 again? Where will the madness end?
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2001
- Messages
- 1,515
- Reaction score
- 1
Why are you planning on being a professional medical student?
Other specialties have to recertify. It has been like that for a while...
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2001
- Messages
- 1,515
- Reaction score
- 1
NO MCAT is to get into medical school.
USMLE is to compete your MD degree.
Regardless, it is stupid to compare USMLE (a 3 part exam taken during medical school) with a board certification.
And, as I pointed out it is not as if pathology is the first field to move from a permanent board certification to an expiring one.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,962
- Reaction score
- 79
My bad.
