A request to the "6000-plus" proponents for a name change

[jdtpac]

"My NAME is John, my TITLE is Physician Assistant". And may I ask, "what is the game plan you would propose for implementing your request to our profession to change our professional identity"?

I read with great interest the proclamation/petition (and the hundreds of supporting postings) that was initiated by jmj11on April 4, 2010 titled "An Open Letter to All PA’s: The Time Has Come for a Professional Name Change". Amidst the multitude of PAs who are endorsing this document are individuals that could be on a "Who's Who" list for the profession and also includes many past and currently serving officers of the American Academy of Physician Assistants Board of Directors. These are PAs who I have respected for their involvement and dedication to the physician assistant profession for most of my 38 year career. As many of us are aware, this is not the first time issue of title dissatisfaction has been debated since the inception of our profession over 40 years ago. My purpose is not to question the opinion expressed in this document. My request now, as it has been each time this issue was debated, is to finally come to a consensus on the proper terminology to be used. Throughout this document and over the many years of debating this issue the words "NAME" and "TITLE" are often interchanged with one another referring to the same thing, the identity of our profession. I think the time has come for us to finally decide which of these two words is most appropriate to use when discussing/debating our professional identity. In the open letter the word name was used 20 times and title was only used 8. Now you may think, "what's the big deal" and why is this guy being so knit-picking?

 

There are two very important reasons why I think we should agree on which of the two words should always be used when referring to our professional identity. First, is the proper use of terminology. A title is a prefix or suffix added to someone's name to signify either an individual’s official position or their professional or academic qualifications. And second, if a call for a change in our title of physician assistant is ever ratified by the profession and we have to go in front of legislators, physician organizations and the public to request a change, I think we would sound much more eloquent when we explained that our desire is to change our professional title.

Currently I neither support nor oppose the rationale and ideals expressed in the open letter calling for a change in our professional title. All the bullet points contained in the document citing the reasons for the dissatisfaction with our professional title are very well articulated and impassionately expressed the proponent’s displeasure for the title physician assistant. However, not once in this document, or whenever this issue has been debated in the past, have the proponents for a title change outlined or suggested a plan for enacting a universal procedure to be implemented if the profession ratifies a title change. Nor have they ever once discussed the financial implications a title change would have on the Academy, its constituent organizations and the profession as a whole. What do they think is going to happen? Is the self-declared “Name Change Committee” going to persuade a particular constituent organization to submit a resolution at the upcoming House of Delegates meeting in Toronto, Canada? If the HOD agrees with a call to change our professional title, and under the new Academy bylaws, if the Board of Directors approves, what happens next? Do we all agree that on October 6, 2012 (National PA Day) we stop using our current title and start calling ourselves “Physician Associates”? I for one cannot rally around any faction within our profession who lobbies for a title change that does not have a well thought out action plan on how this would be accomplished. I honestly believe there are 6000, or more, of my professional colleagues who might have the same concerns.

 

I only hope that from this point on when we debate what should be the appropriate title to be used that accurately defines who we are based on the health care services we provide, we refer to the word identifier as our “TITLE” and not our “NAME”.

I greatly appreciate the opportunity to have expressed my opinion on this issue and hope the leadership of our profession and the membership seriously consider my concern and this request. Thank you.

 

Respectfully submitted,

John D. Trimbath,MPAS,PA-C

Past President, Ohio Association of Physician Assistants

Past Secretary and Delegate-at-Large, American Academy of Physician Assistants

2003 Recipient of the AAPA House of Delegates Outstanding Service Award

[HMtoPA]

Oh, so this​ is why nothing gets done.

[EMEDPA]

several of us on this forum are intimately involved with the name/title change proposition.

I have forwarded this on to our working group for discussion. thank you for your concerns. we will discuss them at our next mtg.

 

emedpa, member name change committee and signer of 100 leaders statement

[andersenpa]

I'm involved in the work group as well.

I can tell you that, in our discussions, we have talked about the very issues you are bringing up. Some of it is a matter of not putting the cart before the horse. It is a small group, with limited resources, essentially working from the outside-in without any support from our national organiazation. The determined sequence of events was to get number on supportive PAs, present this to the AAPA to see if they bite, and then move ahead with a HOD resolution.

 

You don't see any of the cost analysis/etc in the document becuase that is not its purpose. The purpose was to investigate a single question- do you support a name/title change. As you may have seen in the AAPA's questionnaire, bringing cost into the equation obfusctaes the issue.

 

As far as implementation, this will be a state by state issue. The name/title change needs national endorsements, after which the states and their legislation can move ahead.

 

I would hesitate to claim that the name/title change issue has not been "well thought out" based only on the information that has been brought forward in the initial proposal statement. As you well know, with you academy background.... more goes on in the background than is evident to the public at large.

 

Matt Andersen PAC

[andersenpa]

Additionally...

perhaps as a former board member you have some knowledge of the costs incurred when we dropped the 's from Physician's Assistant in the books.

[ventana]

I never understood people that argue against change based on not having the entire course clearly laid out in front of them with every possible problem presented with a solution......

 

I unconditionally support the TITLE change to Physician Associate - because I ASSIST no one. I do the exact same job as my SP for about 35% the pay (I am internal Medicine) I take more call then 2/3 of my practice, and am one of the top revenue generators - yet to the senior partners I am "just an assistant"

 

I don't care how change is afforded - as nike says "just do it"

 

My uneducated understanding is that the drop of the 's was just a simple legislative change and cost very little - would this not be the same thing??

[CAdamsPAC]

I'm just working on providing the best care that I can regardless of my title, just like I did when my job title was "Physician Associate" for 18 years! My patients want me to help them and haven't ever questioned my care b/c of my job title.

[physasst]

Thanks for the post John. You bring up many salient points, that as Matt and EMED state, we have discussed in our work group. This is certainly a complex topic with many variables.

 

BTW, You have been an inspiration in your recovery and continued service to our profession, and I feel fortunate to be able to call you a friend of many years.

 

 

Michael Halasy

[jdtpac]

Michael, thank you for the kind words. I wanted to wait a few days to respond to some of the questions that were raised to see if there were other questions.

 

The dropping of the 's was not as easy as it may have appeared. I was involved in the AAPA when that happened which was somewhere around the late 1980s. I can't tell you what the monetary cost to all the organizations were just to change logos and letterhead, nor can I tell you how much the legislative expense was for this issue. I do know however, although most state organizations have changed their title and logo to reflect the drop of the 's there are still some sites where the words physician's assistant remain in the statutes and regulations, Michigan is one state that comes to mind. I can't tell you that when we tried to drop the 's in Ohio, it took us two iterations over two legislative sessions(four years) before we could accomplish this and the biggest opposition came from the physician organizations that this was our first attempt at trying to get independent practice. I also can tell you with just trying to do some minor changes to our practice act with the cost of utilizing a lobbyist and all the other work that goes into that, on average our costs were about $10,000-$20,000 per year.