Why can't PharmDs adddress themselves as doctors?

Started by rxjotka
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

rxjotka

New Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I have had several rotations and worked with a lot of PharmDs, and I seem to have noticed that some of them do not have the courage to address themselves or their professional colleagues by their academic title, PharmD. I think this trend is unprofessional and if it continues, the professional recognition pharmacists are continuously looking for from among members of the healthcare team will be very hard to achieve. After 4 years in undergrad, 4 years in Pharm school and 1 or 2 years of residency or fellowship as the case maybe, I believe we should enjoy professional recognitions like the PhDs,MDs, DDS, DO and other professionals with a doctoral degree. just my two cents...what is your take on this one?
 
Clearly, the recognition is Doctor of Pharmacy. If you are MD, you are Doctor of medicine like a PHarm D is a doctor of pharmacy. Doctors prescribe the treatment but pharm Ds know the ins and outs of what it really does and how it behaves in the human system. Clearly pharmacists are doctors and shoudln't think that they are inferior to any health care professional including MD.
 
I think the mixing of B.S. and PharmD people is the main reason. If some kid that just got out of school was addressed as "Dr. Such-and-such" while a 30 year vet was called "Bob" it probably wouldn't go over too well. I'd say in 20 years or so we might see it more, but for now I wouldn't keep your hopes up.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Or perhaps some of us just don't care about it enough to be bothered by it. Even after I got my Masters degree my wife still refused to address me as master.
 
rxjotka said:
I have had several rotations and worked with a lot of PharmDs, and I seem to have noticed that some of them do not have the courage to address themselves or their professional colleagues by their academic title, PharmD. I think this trend is unprofessional and if it continues, the professional recognition pharmacists are continuously looking for from among members of the healthcare team will be very hard to achieve. After 4 years in undergrad, 4 years in Pharm school and 1 or 2 years of residency or fellowship as the case maybe, I believe we should enjoy professional recognitions like the PhDs,MDs, DDS, DO and other professionals with a doctoral degree. just my two cents...what is your take on this one?

What does your screen name (rx-jotka) mean?
 
another reason i don't think pharmd's refer to themselves as Dr. is becasue their are so many of them now and it will just continue to grow. it seems to me that becasue there are so many pharmd's, and soon to be pharmd's, that the title has lost some luster and meaning. 20 years afo when people actully had to work for their pharmd degree it actully carried some weight. no schools just hand them out like candy. to me a pharmd is no different today then what a b.s. in pharmacy was 20 yrs ago.
 
TotalKayOs said:
to me a pharmd is no different today then what a b.s. in pharmacy was 20 yrs ago.

All that really matters is that you practice good pharmacy and your check clears the bank
 
TotalKayOs said:
20 years afo when people actully had to work for their pharmd degree it actully carried some weight. no schools just hand them out like candy.

There was no PharmD degree 20 years ago. And where are they handing them out like candy now where you don't actually have to work for the degree?
 
JTD1972 said:
There was no PharmD degree 20 years ago.

Actually, USC started the first six year doctorate program in pharmacy back in 1950. I believe UCSF started theirs up sometime around 1955.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
LVPharm said:
Actually, USC started the first six year doctorate program in pharmacy back in 1950. I believe UCSF started theirs up sometime around 1955.

My bad, LVPharm. But a PharmD degree was never required to practice 20 years ago, correct? I suppose it is irrelevant now. Anyway my main question to TotalKayOs was who is handing out PharmD degrees like candy where you don't actually have to work for the degree?
 
JTD1972 said:
My bad, LVPharm. But a PharmD degree was never required to practice 20 years ago, correct? I suppose it is irrelevant now. Anyway my main question to TotalKayOs was who is handing out PharmD degrees like candy where you don't actually have to work for the degree?

You are correct...it was an added qualification, not unlike what a PGY1 residency serves these days.

I've actually heard similar sentiments from the older Pharm.D.'s that earned the degree post-BSPharm. Whether you can attribute that to a bit of "sour graping", I just don't know. It's not being handed out like candy, but it's the only thing being handed out by pharmacy schools. Simply because there may be low attrition rates at some schools doesn't mean all those students didn't earn it.

The degree is meant to underscore a higher level (or amount) of clinical training than was customary in the baccalaureate curricula. I've heard BSPharm's challenge that point...but that's the position stated by the "forces that be" that made the Pharm.D. the sole entry-level degree for pharmacy.
 
Hi there,
Any person who holds a doctorate can address themselves as "Doctor". This goes for Doctor of Theology, Doctor of Phlosphy, Doctor of Pharmacology etc. Like the quote: "Freedom of speech does not give one the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded movie theatre", refering to one's self as "Doctor" in a clinical environment should be tempered with appropriateness. It is not appropriate for a Pharm.D to walk into a cardiac arrest situation, state that I am Dr. So and so and begin to run the code. It is not appropriate for an MD to walk into a chemistry class and state begin lecture as Dr. So and so if they do not hold a Ph.D in chemistry.

With the team approach to medicine, many people who hold doctorates are present in a hospital. As a physician, I recognize their degrees and I certainly appreciate their input into the care of my patients. I have no problem addressing persons with doctoral degrees as Dr. but when it comes to clinical matters, the MD/DO is the person who directs patient care. It would be very inappropriate for a Doctor of Nursing or a Ph.D in Biochemistry to speak to a patient or patient's family as the director of that patient's care. I am sure that any person holding that degree would never cast themselves in that role in a clinical situation anyway.

As long as we all treat each other with respect, how we are addressed is pretty meaningless. As a physician and scientist ( MD/Ph.D), I totally understand the amount of education required to obtain a doctorate in any field and I respect the people who are able to get through these difficult degree programs successfully.

In the classroom, in the meeting rooms and on the street or where ever, the reference to ones self as "Doctor" should be appropriately used. Outside the hospital and to my friends and non-clinical acquaintances, I never refer to myself as "Doctor". I never refer to myself as "Doctor" in any non-clinical situation. In a patient care situation, I do use the term and refer to my physician colleagues as "Doctor" in front of patients and their families. This helps to reduce their stress much in the same way as donning a white coat means that you are held to a high standard.

Pharm.Ds are valuable folks who provide a very valuable service in the care of my patients. In short, we all work together for the best patient care at the highest level. As more and more medicine has become multidisciplinary, we as physician's "get it" when it comes to recognization of other doctoral degrees and the input that they provide to our patient care. In formal situations, we are all doctors and I welcome the expertise that we all bring to patient care. To be so arrogant as to not recognize any doctorate degree is poor form on the part of a physician.

njbmd 🙂
 
njbmd said:
Hi there,
Any person who holds a doctorate can address themselves as "Doctor". This goes for Doctor of Theology, Doctor of Phlosphy, Doctor of Pharmacology etc. Like the quote: "Freedom of speech does not give one the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded movie theatre", refering to one's self as "Doctor" in a clinical environment should be tempered with appropriateness. It is not appropriate for a Pharm.D to walk into a cardiac arrest situation, state that I am Dr. So and so and begin to run the code. It is not appropriate for an MD to walk into a chemistry class and state begin lecture as Dr. So and so if they do not hold a Ph.D in chemistry.

With the team approach to medicine, many people who hold doctorates are present in a hospital. As a physician, I recognize their degrees and I certainly appreciate their input into the care of my patients. I have no problem addressing persons with doctoral degrees as Dr. but when it comes to clinical matters, the MD/DO is the person who directs patient care. It would be very inappropriate for a Doctor of Nursing or a Ph.D in Biochemistry to speak to a patient or patient's family as the director of that patient's care. I am sure that any person holding that degree would never cast themselves in that role in a clinical situation anyway.

As long as we all treat each other with respect, how we are addressed is pretty meaningless. As a physician and scientist ( MD/Ph.D), I totally understand the amount of education required to obtain a doctorate in any field and I respect the people who are able to get through these difficult degree programs successfully.

In the classroom, in the meeting rooms and on the street or where ever, the reference to ones self as "Doctor" should be appropriately used. Outside the hospital and to my friends and non-clinical acquaintances, I never refer to myself as "Doctor". I never refer to myself as "Doctor" in any non-clinical situation. In a patient care situation, I do use the term and refer to my physician colleagues as "Doctor" in front of patients and their families. This helps to reduce their stress much in the same way as donning a white coat means that you are held to a high standard.

Pharm.Ds are valuable folks who provide a very valuable service in the care of my patients. In short, we all work together for the best patient care at the highest level. As more and more medicine has become multidisciplinary, we as physician's "get it" when it comes to recognization of other doctoral degrees and the input that they provide to our patient care. In formal situations, we are all doctors and I welcome the expertise that we all bring to patient care. To be so arrogant as to not recognize any doctorate degree is poor form on the part of a physician.

njbmd 🙂


👍 👍 I sure hope, in the future, if not now, that you speak at seminars or teach b/c you'd be a great role model not just for other MDs but also for everyone in general who holds a Doctorate of some sort.
 
I could not have said it any better!



njbmd said:
Hi there,
Any person who holds a doctorate can address themselves as "Doctor". This goes for Doctor of Theology, Doctor of Phlosphy, Doctor of Pharmacology etc. Like the quote: "Freedom of speech does not give one the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded movie theatre", refering to one's self as "Doctor" in a clinical environment should be tempered with appropriateness. It is not appropriate for a Pharm.D to walk into a cardiac arrest situation, state that I am Dr. So and so and begin to run the code. It is not appropriate for an MD to walk into a chemistry class and state begin lecture as Dr. So and so if they do not hold a Ph.D in chemistry.

With the team approach to medicine, many people who hold doctorates are present in a hospital. As a physician, I recognize their degrees and I certainly appreciate their input into the care of my patients. I have no problem addressing persons with doctoral degrees as Dr. but when it comes to clinical matters, the MD/DO is the person who directs patient care. It would be very inappropriate for a Doctor of Nursing or a Ph.D in Biochemistry to speak to a patient or patient's family as the director of that patient's care. I am sure that any person holding that degree would never cast themselves in that role in a clinical situation anyway.

As long as we all treat each other with respect, how we are addressed is pretty meaningless. As a physician and scientist ( MD/Ph.D), I totally understand the amount of education required to obtain a doctorate in any field and I respect the people who are able to get through these difficult degree programs successfully.

In the classroom, in the meeting rooms and on the street or where ever, the reference to ones self as "Doctor" should be appropriately used. Outside the hospital and to my friends and non-clinical acquaintances, I never refer to myself as "Doctor". I never refer to myself as "Doctor" in any non-clinical situation. In a patient care situation, I do use the term and refer to my physician colleagues as "Doctor" in front of patients and their families. This helps to reduce their stress much in the same way as donning a white coat means that you are held to a high standard.

Pharm.Ds are valuable folks who provide a very valuable service in the care of my patients. In short, we all work together for the best patient care at the highest level. As more and more medicine has become multidisciplinary, we as physician's "get it" when it comes to recognization of other doctoral degrees and the input that they provide to our patient care. In formal situations, we are all doctors and I welcome the expertise that we all bring to patient care. To be so arrogant as to not recognize any doctorate degree is poor form on the part of a physician.

njbmd 🙂
 
pretty much every pharmacy school now hands them out like candy. the requirements to earn a pharmd are no where are rigourous as they were in years past. i have heard my profs with pharmd's talk about how they had to write a thesis and defend it in committee in addition to clinical and staffing work in a hospital. most of them agree that the pharmd's of today do not have to earn their degrees like they did. these profs i am talk about are the ones that had a b.s. in pharmacy then went back for 2 years for post grad work to get the pharmd.
 
TotalKayOs said:
pretty much every pharmacy school now hands them out like candy. the requirements to earn a pharmd are no where are rigourous as they were in years past. i have heard my profs with pharmd's talk about how they had to write a thesis and defend it in committee in addition to clinical and staffing work in a hospital. most of them agree that the pharmd's of today do not have to earn their degrees like they did. these profs i am talk about are the ones that had a b.s. in pharmacy then went back for 2 years for post grad work to get the pharmd.

So you've come to the conclusion that "pretty much every pharmacy school now hands them out like candy" because a couple of your professors told you so. 🙄
 
i would tend to agree that the current pharmD program is not what it was of years past. most "real" pharmDs i have talked to have affirmed that statement as well.

i personally believe there should have been a shift not to a pharmd but to a dph or something of the sort ( in TN all rphs were grandfathered in as dphs while the pharmds remained that)
 
TotalKayOs said:
pretty much every pharmacy school now hands them out like candy. the requirements to earn a pharmd are no where are rigourous as they were in years past. i have heard my profs with pharmd's talk about how they had to write a thesis and defend it in committee in addition to clinical and staffing work in a hospital. most of them agree that the pharmd's of today do not have to earn their degrees like they did. these profs i am talk about are the ones that had a b.s. in pharmacy then went back for 2 years for post grad work to get the pharmd.
Forget the part that when some of them were in school there was literally 200 drugs? How many of them knew how an NMR worked? How many could describe the life cycle of HIV or were aware of prions? How many knew the definition of pharmaceutical care? Did their professors talk about ELISA and pharmacogenomics?

The profession has changed. There is constantly more information that is required. 20 years from now the pharmacy students will complain that we had it too easy. And we will complain that with 150 schools it is too easy to get accepted.
 
ancedotal evidence. yes. so what? there is no empiric evidence to say that school is easier now. the only way to determine that is by talking to people who went to school then and try and compare as best we can. and so what if there are more drugs now, or if you know how an NMR works or the life cycle of HIV. These are things that are considered fundamental now for our profession if you really want to be a good (clinical) pharmacist. the program should push people to continue to build and grow. and after talking to a few old school pharmds (granted it is a very few) i do not feel as though the current programs in general are as rigorous as before.
 
TotalKayOs said:
ancedotal evidence. yes. so what? there is no empiric evidence to say that school is easier now. the only way to determine that is by talking to people who went to school then and try and compare as best we can. and so what if there are more drugs now, or if you know how an NMR works or the life cycle of HIV. These are things that are considered fundamental now for our profession if you really want to be a good (clinical) pharmacist. the program should push people to continue to build and grow. and after talking to a few old school pharmds (granted it is a very few) i do not feel as though the current programs in general are as rigorous as before.

well logically speaking, how could an outdated education be superior? Its like saying the medical classes in 1920 were taught better and more rigorously than the ones now. Well that may be but it doesn't mean the total education (in and of itself) was superior to the ones being offered now.

have to look at total package.
 
TotalKayOs said:
pretty much every pharmacy school now hands them out like candy. the requirements to earn a pharmd are no where are rigourous as they were in years past. i have heard my profs with pharmd's talk about how they had to write a thesis and defend it in committee in addition to clinical and staffing work in a hospital. most of them agree that the pharmd's of today do not have to earn their degrees like they did. these profs i am talk about are the ones that had a b.s. in pharmacy then went back for 2 years for post grad work to get the pharmd.


You sir.. are an idiot.
 
TotalKayOs said:
ancedotal evidence. yes. so what? there is no empiric evidence to say that school is easier now. the only way to determine that is by talking to people who went to school then and try and compare as best we can. and so what if there are more drugs now, or if you know how an NMR works or the life cycle of HIV. These are things that are considered fundamental now for our profession if you really want to be a good (clinical) pharmacist. the program should push people to continue to build and grow. and after talking to a few old school pharmds (granted it is a very few) i do not feel as though the current programs in general are as rigorous as before.


Well sir, let me help you.

Compare the historical NAPLEX / Ca Board passing rates . Do you see a drop off? If so, your subjective assumption is correct. If not, you're wrong. And so are your profs..

But man.. They sure don't make the cars like the way they used to ..u know..cuz my 69 Camaro with 411 realend, double barrel carb..and edelbrock manifolds can sure kick today's Camaro's arse.. And my education of course was so much tougher..cuz I had to walk 20 miles in the snow..then hitch a ride on a tractor..shoeless to get to school..yada yada..
 
ZpackSux said:
..shoeless to get to school..yada yada..

did you wrap your feet in old newspapers and tie them with string your mother saved off of wrapped meat packages from the butchers?
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
aubieRx said:
did you wrap your feet in old newspapers and tie them with string your mother saved off of wrapped meat packages from the butchers?


How did u know..
 
🙄 cause you still have headlines from the late 60s on your feet

actually make that early 70s i suspect you didnt do much walking in the late 60s
 
my belief is what i stated earlier and it's too bad you have to revert to name calling before making an argument. i feel as though the pharmd title at one time was a lofty title and one that deserved respect. i don't particulary feel that way about the hordes of students that graduate every year with that same degree. i feel as though it has lost some of it's luster.
 
TotalKayOs said:
i feel as though the pharmd title at one time was a lofty title and one that deserved respect. i don't particulary feel that way about the hordes of students that graduate every year with that same degree. i feel as though it has lost some of it's luster.

Ok, make an argument. Why do you feel this way. Because a few profs said they had to do thesis? Are you saying that the respect is less deserved now..because?
 
All the PharmDs I've known in hospital and academic settings have always been referred to as "doctor", but some don't need to insist on the title like many MDs.

In retail, PharmDs don't get called anything, so I can see why they wouldn't be called "doctor", but I certainly have heard them referred to by their title in many cases. I wasn't aware that they weren't. If an optometrist or chiro can, why not pharmacists?

I feel badly for the lawyers who earn a JD (Doctor of Jurisprudence) after 7-8 years of school, yet their profession and custom ignores the title. I think if you hold the degree of Doctor (Law, Medicine, Pharmacy, whatever), you can use the title appropriately, but you can also choose not to use it.

NO ONE, AND I MEAN NO ONE, should use their title in non-work settings, unless they are dealing with arrogant health care providers! 🙂 Why call yourself doctor at the tire shop or on your airline ticket? That is just...wrong.