An Open Letter to All PAs: The Time Has Come for a Professional Name Change

[Hemegroup]

Any confusion in titles?

 

Job Opening:

Description

Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey (RMA), one of the region’s leading centers for the treatment of infertility and research in reproductive medicine is pleased to announce our expansion to the Eatontown, NJ area. If you share our commitment to excellence in patient care and making dreams come true, this is an excellent opportunity to be part of a state-of-the art infertility practice as we continue to grow.

 

We are currently seeking a highly motivated Physician Assistant with prior medical office experience in a busy multi-physician practice, preferably women’s healthcare. Prior medical office experience can be as a nurse, medical assistant, or other hands-on patient care provider. The right candidate must have excellent interpersonal and multi-tasking skills, along with a demonstrated self-directed work ethic needed to succeed in this shared responsibility with our physicians. Strong computer skills and keyboard speed of at least 30 wpm is required.

 

Base schedule is approximately 30 hours per week, most days starting at 6:00 a.m., as well as alternate weekends (Saturday & Sunday) 6:00 a.m. – noon and occasional holidays.

 

At RMA, we offer a highly competitive compensation package and the ability to make a difference in our practice and in the lives of others. Please e-mail your resume to: resume@rmanj.com. We also invite you to visit our website at http://www.rmanj.com. Please click on the link for Job Description:

 

Job posting

 

If I may ... even the would-be misnomer Physician's Associate, sounds less confusing than Physician's Assistant!

 

One of my current Ob/Gyn preceptors (a MD, who only takes PA students and has done so for the last decade), is all for the name change. After hearing about the current proposal, he's already started introducing us as his Physician Associate students. He thinks it is an appropriate and excellent idea.

[PUA]

If I may ... even the would-be misnomer Physician's Associate, sounds less confusing than Physician's Assistant!

 

One of my current Ob/Gyn preceptors (a MD, who only takes PA students and has done so for the last decade), is all for the name change. After hearing about the current proposal, he's already started introducing us as his Physician Associate students. He thinks it is an appropriate and excellent idea.

 

Glad to hear there are MDs who supported us. At the end of the day, Doctors are still going to be doctors. They should not be afraid of the name change.

[huskymed]

This is exactly the problem!!! I dont see how THEY (AAPA) does not see this as an issue. I do not understand how they dont think that descriptions such as this and being lumped in with MA's is not detrimental. Sometimes I think I need to go back to school and become an NP so I don't have to deal with this craziness. Rob

 

Hey - I've had the same thought. At least they have a National Association that listens to its members ...

[pigsooie]

I don't think abandoning the aapa is the right idea.

emedpa, pa-c, dfaapa

 

Agree. AAPA successfully campaigns for the PA profession on many legislative issues at the federal and state level. I'd like a name change too but disagreement on one topic or even a few isn't enough reason to withdraw my membership. Instead, I plan on being progressively more involved with my state chapter and then I'll be able to advocate from within the organization.

[Joelseff]

This is exactly the problem!!! I dont see how THEY (AAPA) does not see this as an issue. I do not understand how they dont think that descriptions such as this and being lumped in with MA's is not detrimental. Sometimes I think I need to go back to school and become an NP so I don't have to deal with this craziness. Rob

 

I have ALWAYS wanted to be a PA since i got discharged from the Navy but recently, I had half-seriously questioned my choice. Np's are known to the public as to their role in healthcare and with their clout, they are (in a most dangerous way BTW) are just moving their DNP, or whatever agenda they wish for that matter, forward. If they truly are (not in reality but in the public's, policy maker's eyes) our competition or at least a threat to our relevance in the new healthcare arena, then we are in trouble.

 

I FULLY intend to finish PA school BTW (7 more months baby) :D

[underserved]

E... in general I agree with your premise BUT... the prompt and cavalier dismissal of any input from its constituents is indicative of a larger problem/attitude...

 

The sad part is that its becoming crystal clear that we could provide hundreds to thousands of innovative marketing ideas and examples of the problems the current name causes to support the notions, but its obvious that they aren't even being considered.

 

You know... like when you are debating with someone in person and it becomes obvious that you are wasting your time because they aren't even considering your perspective because instead of listening to and analyzing what you are saying... they are too busy looking for a counter argument and trying to "win."

 

It is crystal clear that the AAPA want nothing to do with the name change. This will not discourage the movement. Rabbit Samurai, thank you for standing up for what is only right for the future of the PA profession. It is going to take all of the old timers like yourself working together to push this thing thru. Thanks again.

[pilot1974]

In my opinion the name change needs to start at the education level. There are already PA programs that award degrees in Physician Associate Studies. I know it is only symantics, but if we can get more programs awarding degrees in Physician Associate Studies the name may finally trickle up to the national organizations. But what do I know, I am only a PA student. Just my 1 cent, I will add the second cent after I get my PA-C.

[delco714]

Now a question: those programs, of which I think Yale has (phys assoc.), do those states include the name associate in their legislation, or is it simply symantics?

[Guest ESSmithPA]

Here is a post that I left on the Clinician 1 website this morning in response to this debate...

 

I have sat reading all the responses posted on this issue and I can certainly see both sides of the argument. However, I agree with Steve Hanson and Ron Pace and believe this initiative is simply not an appropriate way to expend our energy as a profession right now.

 

To begin with, I have to agree that Physician Assistant is not the proper way to describe how we want patients and other healthcare team members to perceive us. And I have no problem with the term Physician Associate, as it really does truly describe more of what we do. That being said, I think the time to change our title was at least 3 decades ago when we were still growing and trying to gain respect. Someone back then missed the boat. I guess we could have used Mr. Bluum and Mr. Mittman’s valiant efforts at that time. All the same, the amount of work done by PA leaders in the past 30+ years is amazing as they worked to earn that respect, and despite our title, we have become a prominent respected member of the healthcare field. Despite only having a profession of 75,000+ people, our own AAPA President stood alongside physician and nurse leaders alongside the President of the United States when healthcare was a central topic of our government. Since when has a Physician Assistant ever been in the same sentence as doctor or nurse from a US President? Well, this past year we have seen it too many times to count. Educating our government, our hospital associations, the insurance industry, our physician leaders, and most importantly our patients has led us to this point. So now, at a time when our moment to rise to the challenge and do what we are trained to do during one of the most challenging times in our nation’s history is upon us, why are we going to take about 10 steps backward and start over again. I haven’t seen one post on this board that has convinced me that it is worth it.

 

I keep hearing that there is an overwhelming outcry for this name change, and it is certainly pretty obvious on this message board. However, is this really the overwhelming majority of PAs? I saw one post claim 85% of PAs want this name change. Really? I find that interesting, for a few reasons. Our Florida LGA polled over 90 PA leaders in Florida who are all on our LGA listserve about this issue when it first came up from Mr. Bluum’s original email a couple weeks back. (This listserve by the way includes local area reps, random PA members who are interested in the political process, and PA educators in our state. Any Florida Academy member who asks to join this listserve is placed on here by our LGA Chair. ) When the question went out, we received overwhelming response that this change was unnecessary and counterproductive to our efforts. Of all the many responses received, none, not even one, was in favor of this name change. Perhaps the only thing I agree with that was said so far is the AAPA should poll its membership on the issue and how high they prioritize it. I think many of you on this forum would be shocked at the response you see.

 

Most of the comments I read seem to stem from a notion that the AAPA should stop being afraid to push for this change just because of fear of backlash from the AMA. Why is there such an overwhelming tone of irritation by people about worries regarding physician sentiment? Lets not forget, support from physician organizations on both the national and state levels were the simple reasons for a great majority of successes in our practice rights improvements. You could have the entire profession of 75,000 plus demanding a name change, and it wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans if physician leaders didn’t support it. If you believe otherwise, you are very misguided.

 

I read a response from one PA who noted that he currently goes by “Physician Associate” because that is where “our roots” are. Really? Perhaps I need to brush up on my PA history a bit, because I recall no roots in this term. I do however recall that our profession was born out of a need by physicians to reach patients and injured military during wartime when there weren’t enough physicians to go around. I think the root of our profession is “medic.” So should I advocate that we be called “Physician’s Medic”?

 

Lets not forget folks that physicians created this profession based out of need, a need that now is greater than it has ever been in any of our lives as healthcare changes loom to extend coverage to millions more on a system that is already undermanned. To keep reading these posts, many of which have bitter tones against physicians, simply confuses me. We are part of the Physician/PA TEAM. It is the Team model of healthcare that our profession was built for. The unfortunate fact that we have in the past faced some physician backlash on practice issues is sad considering that the physicians created us and put us here for this purpose, to help them. However, that was our purpose and our “root” as a profession. To help the physicians reach those they could not reach. Dare I say, to assist them. I guess that makes me an assistant. I’m sorry many of your cannot live with that designation. However, I can.

I leave you now with a comment left on our Florida LGA Listserve by a Florida PA educator, Keith Moore, which perfectly explains the consensus of what PA leaders who I know are recognizing as the challenge faced when undertaking such a proposed name change. I hope many of you can take this to heart, as I think he is right on target about how inappropriate this name change really is right now:

-

“Changing the name of our PA profession at this juncture is counterproductive. It will engender a debate that will divert the attention of PAs and other stakeholders from other issues of utmost importance. The physician assistant (PA) profession has a unified national, state and health care community identity that is hard to come by for most health care groups. Do we really want to put that on the line?

 

Changing our name would require opening PA practice statutes across the country to amendment, with the ever present potential for other negative changes to ride along. Federal laws, rules and regulations would need to be amended. Insurance companies would have a field day denying coverage claiming confusion. It will also translate into confusion among patients, physicians and indeed even our colleagues about who is who. And let’s not forget changing names with those efficient bureaucratic hospital and insurance company credentialing committees, the uniformed services (Army, Navy, VA, NHSC) ARC, APPAP, NCCPA ad infinitum.

 

Do we really have nothing more important to do with our time? Rather, let’s continue to define the PA profession by our competency, caring, collaboration and advocacy on behalf of patients and our communities. Let’s remain flexible and innovative and highly adaptable to the changing health care system.

 

The PA name is doing just fine, thank you. “

-

Thanks for allowing me to express my thoughts in this debate. I eagerly await the many criticisms I now expect to receive.

 

Eric S. Smith, MMS, PA-C

FAPA Past President

[Rob77]

So you feel that our title is not representative of what we do and the name should have been changed 30 years ago, but it wasn't so now we just have to suck it up and deal with it? Thats pretty screwed up logic.

[Rob77]

our own AAPA President stood alongside physician and nurse leaders alongside the President of the United States when healthcare was a central topic of our government. Since when has a Physician Assistant ever been in the same sentence as doctor or nurse from a US President? Well, this past year we have seen it too many times to count. Educating our government, our hospital associations, the insurance industry, our physician leaders, and most importantly our patients has led us to this point.

 

HA. We were an afterthought. Only because we initially werent mentioned and thousands sent letters is the only reason we got any recognition. And that has probably done bunk with regards to patients knowing who the hell or what the hell we are.

 

I haven’t seen one post on this board that has convinced me that it is worth it

.

 

I havent seen one post that convinces me its not worth it.

 

Most of the comments I read seem to stem from a notion that the AAPA should stop being afraid to push for this change just because of fear of backlash from the AMA. Why is there such an overwhelming tone of irritation by people about worries regarding physician sentiment?

 

 

Why is there such a fear by our leaders to rock the boat with the AMA?

 

You could have the entire profession of 75,000 plus demanding a name change, and it wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans if physician leaders didn’t support it. If you believe otherwise, you are very misguided.

 

 

Am I the only one who sees that as a problem? Why should they get a say in what our profession in titled? It is our career our vocation and we have the right to title it as we see fit. Not to say "oh no we may make the physicians upset". If we can't even name ourselves we will always be viewed as 2nd rate and honestly I dont know if that assessment would be off the mark.

 

To keep reading these posts, many of which have bitter tones against physicians, simply confuses me. We are part of the Physician/PA TEAM. It is the Team model of healthcare that our profession was built for. The unfortunate fact that we have in the past faced some physician backlash on practice issues is sad considering that the physicians created us and put us here for this purpose, to help them. However, that was our purpose and our “root” as a profession. To help the physicians reach those they could not reach

 

Maybe its time for a change. Today there are more and more PA's who work on their own and based on the state of our healthcare system this may become much more common. Those PA's arent assisting anybody and the title should represent that.

 

Changing our name would require opening PA practice statutes across the country to amendment, with the ever present potential for other negative changes to ride along. Federal laws, rules and regulations would need to be amended. Insurance companies would have a field day denying coverage claiming confusion. It will also translate into confusion among patients, physicians and indeed even our colleagues about who is who. And let’s not forget changing names with those efficient bureaucratic hospital and insurance company credentialing committees, the uniformed services (Army, Navy, VA, NHSC) ARC, APPAP, NCCPA ad infinitum.

 

Just because something is hard and has some inherent risk does not mean it shouldn't be done.

 

Rob Kanaby PA-C

[Guest ESSmithPA]

So you feel that our title should be changed and we should begin all over again convincing people to accept our new name and pretend that makes us more distinguished, all the while creating a process that will set us back 20-30 years in our relationships with doctors, insurance companies and government agencies? Gee, I wonder who has the "screwed up logic" here.

[Rob77]

So you feel that our title should be changed and we should begin all over again convincing people to accept our new name and pretend that makes us more distinguished, all the while creating a process that will set us back 20-30 years in our relationships with doctors, insurance companies and government agencies? Gee, I wonder who has the "screwed up logic" here.

 

I think youre being a bit dramatic here. Is it hard? yes, but it's the right thing to do. It's not going to get any easier to do it in the future so lets get it done now. I bet the next generation of PA will thank us for it. Rob

[Guest ESSmithPA]

<<-<You could have the entire profession of 75,000 plus demanding a name change, and it wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans if physician leaders didn’t support it. If you believe otherwise, you are very misguided. >-

 

Am I the only one who sees that as a problem? Why should they get a say in what our profession in titled? It is our career our vocation and we have the right to title it as we see fit. Not to say "oh no we may make the physicians upset". If we can't even name ourselves we will always be viewed as 2nd rate and honestly I dont know if that assessment would be off the mark.

>>

 

So let me get this straight. A physician (Stead) creates our profession. The AMA adopts standards in 1971 for PA education before their own House of Delegates, implementing a program accreditation system (and still holds major authority within ARC-PA today). In 1972, the AMA convenes representatives to discuss the need for establishing an independent certifying authority for the physician assistant profession, of which the NCCPA is formed. The NCCPA is made up largely of physicians deciding on our certification still today. And you ask why physicians have a right to be involved in our title? Seems pretty obvious to me.

[jmj11]

While we can give due respect to those physicians and physician groups whom have created and nurtured our profession, there comes a time that we must stand on our own two feet. In the same way my children are now mature and leaving home. The reason is simple. While we can be indebted to and respectful of our physician colleagues, we must realize (which is only natural) that they will always view our profession from a physician-centric view. In other words, what can the PAs do for us doctors? They can ease our work, treat our most undesirable patients, increase our income etc. So eventually there comes a time that that we must look out for ourselves. We don't have to be disrespectful in the process. My kids can still respect me, but when they are out on their own they know (as do I) that it would not be psychologically healthy for me to still control their lives.

 

When physician groups (such as the AMA) make untrue statements that create fear in patients that we (and NPs) deliver poor care (such as in retail clinics), in my opinion the time has come that they no longer dictate who I am as a PA. I think this name change, while in no way seeks any kind of practice independence, it is a statement that it is time for the PA profession to be PA-centric and not Physician-centric. Actually, I personally have a great respect for physicians and I do not believe that PAs nor NPs finish school at near the level of physicians. I actually oppose practice independence for NPS or PAs right after graduation because much of our learning comes from on the job experience and new grads need close supervision.

[Rob77]

While we can give due respect to those physicians and physician groups whom have created and nurtured our profession, there comes a time that we must stand on our own two feet. In the same way my children are now mature and leaving home. The reason is simple. While we can be indebted to and respectful of our physician colleagues, we must realize (which is only natural) that they will always view our profession from a physician-centric view. In other words, what can the PAs do for us doctors? They can ease our work, treat our most undesirable patients, increase our income etc. So eventually there comes a time that that we must look out for ourselves. We don't have to be disrespectful in the process. My kids can still respect me, but when they are out on their own they know (as do I) that it would not be psychologically healthy for me to still control their lives.

 

When physician groups (such as the AMA) make untrue statements that create fear in patients that we (and NPs) deliver poor care (such as in retail clinics), in my opinion the time has come that they no longer dictate who I am as a PA. I think this name change, while in no way seeks any kind of practice independence, it is a statement that it is time for the PA profession to be PA-centric and not Physician-centric. Actually, I personally have a great respect for physicians and I do not believe that PAs nor NPs finish school at near the level of physicians. I actually oppose practice independence for NPS or PAs right after graduation because much of our learning comes from on the job experience and new grads need close supervision.

 

well said.

[pigsooie]

Here is a post that I left on the Clinician 1 website this morning in response to this debate...

 

Most of the comments I read seem to stem from a notion that the AAPA should stop being afraid to push for this change just because of fear of backlash from the AMA. Why is there such an overwhelming tone of irritation by people about worries regarding physician sentiment? Lets not forget, support from physician organizations on both the national and state levels were the simple reasons for a great majority of successes in our practice rights improvements. You could have the entire profession of 75,000 plus demanding a name change, and it wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans if physician leaders didn’t support it. If you believe otherwise, you are very misguided.

 

Eric S. Smith, MMS, PA-C

FAPA Past President

 

You're kidding right? In just 30 seconds I found this article on google news that is a common trend among physicians, that they believe we are stepping outside of our ability.

 

[The American Medical Association worries that store-based clinics may not have appropriate referral plans for patients with illnesses requiring more complex care.

 

"We recommend store-based clinics have appropriate physician oversight on site and that patients be clearly informed of the qualifications of the person providing care," says Rebecca Patchin, MD, AMA chair.

 

She adds that store-based clinics should have appropriate physician oversight on site, and that patients "should be clearly informed of the qualifications of the person providing care. Convenience should never compromise safety."

 

The AMA suggests that state and federal agencies "investigate ventures between retail clinics and pharmacy chain with an emphasis on inherent conflicts of interest in such relationships, patients' welfare and risk, and professional liability concerns."

 

The California Medical Association is vehemently opposed, and has fiercely fought to keep drug and grocery store-owned retail clinics out of the state, says Dustin Corcoran, CEO of the California Medical Association.

 

"They're not in the best interest of the patient" for three reasons, he says:

 

1. The care provider hired by the grocery or pharmacy to diagnose patients may be treating a disease or condition that is "beyond his or her scope of practice," he says. Often the provider is a physician's assistant or nurse practitioner who may not recognize symptoms with more serious implications without a physician's assistance, he says.]

 

Time and again, physicians oppose our expanded practice rights and the reason we are seeing success is due to the growing need to expand care, not because of their support.

[Guest ESSmithPA]

If the AMA doesn't like quick care clinics, our organization should be working with them to find a solution that everyone can agree is best for the patient. Obviously they have fought us on issues, I didn't say they were always right, but most of you all should realize that most legislative issues and concerns involving PA practice are fought at the STATE level. Give me an example of one state where PAs have been successful at fighting physicians to improve practice rights. Good luck in finding one. Florida used to make that mistake, and a few years back we began making more efforts to educate the physician leaders and show them how we were on the same team. Once they finally realized we weren't on the same physician-replacing agenda as the NPs, the docs championed many of our causes to help us succeed, and clearly they remain side by side with us on every legislative issue in Tallahassee.

 

This argument is increasingly beginning to sound like one that is simply all about full independence of PAs from physician oversight. It sounds like an NP movement. I for one want nothing to do with that. We practice medicine. NPs practice "advanced nursing." The NP movement was born from nurses who were adversarial to physicians and wanted to replace them. They are slowly succeeding, unfortunately. The PA movement however was one born of a medical nature by physicians. This isn't a simple case of a child growing up and moving away from home. If this is really what the folks on this initiative are seeking, you need to spend your energy and time seeking a PA to Physician bridge program, not changing our name. We are not independent practitioners folks. And changing our name won't make us that way. I know many are bitter that with our training intensity, we have to watch NPs take a road that is arguably much less intense than our own to become equal to physicians. But we are not NPs, we are PAs. That is their initiative, not ours. If we can't embrace the physician led Physician/PA Team model, than we have failed in understanding our purpose in the grand scheme of patient-centered health care.

[burnpac]

While we can give due respect to those physicians and physician groups whom have created and nurtured our profession, there comes a time that we must stand on our own two feet. In the same way my children are now mature and leaving home. The reason is simple. While we can be indebted to and respectful of our physician colleagues, we must realize (which is only natural) that they will always view our profession from a physician-centric view. In other words, what can the PAs do for us doctors? They can ease our work, treat our most undesirable patients, increase our income etc. So eventually there comes a time that that we must look out for ourselves. We don't have to be disrespectful in the process. My kids can still respect me, but when they are out on their own they know (as do I) that it would not be psychologically healthy for me to still control their lives.

 

When physician groups (such as the AMA) make untrue statements that create fear in patients that we (and NPs) deliver poor care (such as in retail clinics), in my opinion the time has come that they no longer dictate who I am as a PA. I think this name change, while in no way seeks any kind of practice independence, it is a statement that it is time for the PA profession to be PA-centric and not Physician-centric. Actually, I personally have a great respect for physicians and I do not believe that PAs nor NPs finish school at near the level of physicians. I actually oppose practice independence for NPS or PAs right after graduation because much of our learning comes from on the job experience and new grads need close supervision.

 

I also think that this is well said. I would fine tune it to state that we should be "patient centered". You all may not believe or accept this, but the days are long past when the Academy looks to the AMA or AAFP for leadership. We have representation at their policy making bodies, but otherwise we don't attend their meetings unless there is a reason or agenda for a meeting with their leadership. It is my obervation that the profession has developed a significant maturity in the past 10 years, and we need to stand on our own two feet, advocating for the patients that we serve.

 

That said, I believe in team practice, and believe that these teams should be physician led. PAs are uniquely qualified and experienced to be leaders also in these teams, and that was why is was so important that HC reform legislation recognized PAs in the medical home and chronic care management models of care.

--

Steve Hanson

Bakersfield CA

[jmj11]

It is an issue of semantics. Of course we should be patient-centered and having control over our own profession does not distract but reinforces that commitment. I could give many personal examples to make my case but I will stick with the retail clinic one. I've never worked in retail clinics so this is not personal. But when the AMA stops only a hair short of a total opposition to retail clinics they claim they do it for the patients because PAs and NPs are too dumb to diagnose without immediate oversight (you can read their verbiage and I'm not embellishing). What really is at stake is the physician's interest. The patient-centered interest is to offer them competent, low-cost and convenient care and that is what a PA wants. I could argue many cases like this where the PA stands in support for those patient-center principles. We couldn't practice in Mississippi for decades due to a variety of political interests (including nursing and physician opposition) but who suffered? There were plenty of well-paying PA positions outside of Mississippi. But it was the people of Mississippi who suffered. They have the poorest medical care in America.

 

This issue of PA name is equally a patient-centered issue. When a brand new patient walks in the door of the clinic and either they are given the choice or sometimes have no choice to see the "Physician's Assistant" (I put the 's in their because that is how they perceive) they will either, mistakenly, pass on good health care at hand, or see the PA with skepticism thinking that this assistant is not competent (based on their misleading title) to treat them. So it is the patient who suffers. Sure, in time, if the patient comes back that you can show them that you care and that you really are competent. But patient-center health care sufferers when there are any roadblocks, even a linguistic one.

 

In my office I don't use any titles but "Mike." My name with PA-C or MPAS-C or Physician Assistant is written everywhere. I don't care what people call me, I only want to have the opportunity to give quality care. Right now things are going very well because, after six years of hard work, everyone in our part of the state knows that I give good care. But when I came here seven years ago to start a brand new practice it was an extremely difficult up-hill battle. A few referring physicians were boycotting me . . . simply because of their perceptions that PAs offer dangerous and inferior care. In the beginning (as many people in this area were not familiar with the physician assistant profession) did not want to see me. So I had to build a reputation. That is what the AAPA had advocated and it does work, to some extent. But, it would be much easier if the public knew who were were and what we can do SO we could give them the quality care they deserve in a patient-centered way.

 

Sorry . . . didn't have time to proof read as I have a patient and I try never to make them wait.

[underserved]

I think youre being a bit dramatic here. Is it hard? yes, but it's the right thing to do. It's not going to get any easier to do it in the future so lets get it done now. I bet the next generation of PA will thank us for it. Rob

I will be a first year PA-S and I thank you Rob for working towards creating an even more successful infrastructure for the next generation of PAs. You have my word. I will pay it forward by fighting hard to represent the best interest of the PA profession for future PAs.

[Rob77]

If the AMA doesn't like quick care clinics, our organization should be working with them to find a solution that everyone can agree is best for the patient

 

The AMA doesnt like retail clinics because they view it as a threat to their practices and their bottom line. They use the mantra of patient saftey to scare people into agreeing with them. An organization like the AMA or the AOA will throw us under the bus in heart beat if it best suited them.

 

We are not independent practitioners folks

.

 

Are you one of those people who say "we do 85% of what physicians do"? This is not a move towards independance it's about self identity. Its about our title being reflective of what we actually do and who we are. The truth is most of us don't assist. We need to explain to our physician counterparts why we need this and why it is important to us. If they can't understand that or if they feel threatened by that then we will need to move foward on our own. If we don't we will stagnate while NP's will flourish and ultimately end up being more desireable. Rob

[EMEDPA]

it's interesting that folks(like mr smith in post 244 above) are seriously talking about a pa to md/do bridge but not at a much more simple name change. I believe we would face huge hurdles getting a pa to doc bridge in place then getting the grads allowed to take licensing exams and go into residencies. I see it happening(most likely at a DO program first) but this seems a much larger undertaking to me than simply changing our name back to what it was at the founding of the profession. both can and should be done but I think the name change is far more important for those who choose to remain pa's vs the 5-10% who might enter a bridge program to md/do. it's interesting that no one in leadership wants to consider a name change although they all agree our current name is inappropriate and some( steve hanson for one) believe if it came to a vote of all pa's that the majority would want a change "just like a vote for lower taxes" in his words. so if the majority of us want it isn't it at least worth having the aapa launch a poll to see what we really want?

emedpa, pa-c, dfaapa

[Contrarian]

It is only a matter of time before the DNP will be allowed to "SUPERVISE" PAs...

[andersenpa]

Disheartening, this conversation moves in circles.

We have two self identified PA leaders on this thread.

It has been established that, in all likelihood, a majority of PAs would support the title change on a national survey/vote.

A reasonable tool for funding that- a dedicated, voluntary donation, has been proposed.

 

 

And still, there has not been recognition of the validity of the initiative.

 

Worse yet, fellow PAs have the gall to cry "ego" as the motivation for the title change.

Really? How sure are you all who claim that this issue is simply about "ego", "inferiority complex" (terms used on this forum)??? You spend years of undergrad and graduate level clinical training to use objective deduction for diagnosis, and yet you feel so comfortable judging the motives of others? Shame on you.

And then, on top of that, to make the wild leap in logic that a desire the make the title more reflective of what we are is somehow a desire for independent practice. This is the same fear mongering I expect from the physician and NP groups, not my own. Shame on you, again.

 

If this PA Leadership response is any indicator of the mood of the remainder of the stae/nat'l academy and chapters, then this movement likely needs to be undertaken external to those that either 1) wish to actively obstruct it, or 2) are too tunnelled into their own ideals of the profession to appreciate the vision of the majority of PAs.

 

Matt Andersen, PA-C