Jump to content

Doctorate of Medicine - Washington State

Recommended Posts

This is great news. The Tennessee bill is still pending approval and I thought they were the only state pursuing this. I hope California gets in on it too. Any updates or further info?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting. Semantics, though: Doctorate of Medical Science (DMS), not Doctorate of Medicine. The distinction is important because the training is different. I will watch this with interest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't see this taking off. Would it only be grads of the LMU program? what about Lynchburg? what about DPAS at Mass college of pharm? what about faculty at DMSc programs who are PAs with other doctorates? could MDs without residency practice as DMScs? How about we fix PA practice first before trying to reinvent the wheel...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't like the verbage of a specific degree (DMS) - should be any clinical doctorate for PAs in my opinion, nor do i like the 2 year degree requirement - which basically limits this to only graduates of LMUs program - not lynchburg, mcphs, etc

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I don't like the verbage of a specific degree (DMS) - should be any clinical doctorate for PAs in my opinion, nor do i like the 2 year degree requirement - which basically limits this to only graduates of LMUs program - not lynchburg, mcphs, etc

The way I read the proposal, it's specifically designed to be exclusive. Likely whoever wrote it has a vested interest in this--it makes some shred of sense to me that the proposal is intended to extend independence to PAs who have completed advanced clinical training, unlike a DHSc. The sticky wicket here is what about all those highly trained residency grads who have loads of experience but only a certificate to show for it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yup and what about folks with other doctorates that cover all the non-clinical portions of the DMSc curriculum? would they have DHSc to DMSc bridge programs for example? This is only for primary care at this point. If this were to pass and they developed a 2nd pathway for EM(the site says they are exploring other specialties) I might get myself a 2nd doctorate...at this point I would only do this program for the following reasons:

1. I only wanted to practice primary care

2. legislation passed (not proposed) in at least  1 state in which I would consider living that granted independence to those who completed the program

I'm sure the folks in the program now are learning great new stuff, but if no state passes legislation granting new rights this program has less value than a residency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

...at this point I would only do this program for the following reasons:

1. I only wanted to practice primary care

2. legislation passed (not proposed) in at least  1 state in which I would consider living that granted independence to those who completed the program

I'm sure the folks in the program now are learning great new stuff, but if no state passes legislation granting new rights this program has less value than a residency. 

 

These are the exact reasons I would do this... And if it passes in California lol

 

As Lisa stated I think the exclusivity is intentional since this is creating a "new" provider... Once a PA becomes a DMS, they are no longer a PA but a DMS. The would need to show, or at least appear to show, that the education and training has bridged the PA to physician level practice...i know a lot of you guys are against it but I see the positives in that it allows a pathway that is more like the "bridge" some of us have envisioned or endorse. I ain't saying it's the right way (this remains to be seen) but I can't help but support measures taken to remove, or at least elevate, our glass ceiling.

 

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should be open to more folks than just the grads of this single program though. maybe the following:

PAs who posses:

a health related doctorate (DrPH, DHSc, PharmD, DPT, etc) +

a residency or 5-10 years practice in a single (non-surgical) specialty with passage of an exam covering the breadth of that specialty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else see WAPA's take on it? They opposed it, saying that any such providers should be brought under the PA practice act, as creating a whole new profession for NO ONE would violate the rules on when to create a new profession...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rev ronin said:

Anyone else see WAPA's take on it? They opposed it, saying that any such providers should be brought under the PA practice act, as creating a whole new profession for NO ONE would violate the rules on when to create a new profession...

I have to agree with their stance. we should be going for FPAR/OTP for all PAs, not special rights for potential grads of one program in another state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/29/2017 at 10:30 PM, rev ronin said:

Anyone else see WAPA's take on it? They opposed it, saying that any such providers should be brought under the PA practice act, as creating a whole new profession for NO ONE would violate the rules on when to create a new profession...

You got a link? I couldn't find info on it. 

 

EDIT: Nevermind, I found it: 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjlquPNl_jWAhXnwFQKHQc5DGwQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wapa.com%2Fassets%2Fdocuments%2Feblast%2F03%20doh%20letter%20regarding%20the%20dms%20sunrise%20review%20wapa%20080817.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2jBfIjXvCfZxeVdtJEU5s6

 

And as I read it, the argument is kind of weak. First they state a DMS can be unregulated because they would be at a minimum, 5 year practicing as a PA but then a few paragraphs down they argue that this sets a dangerous precedent for other health professions...Whatever...Then the cost issue was brought up. If costs will make this unsustainable then why oppose it and just let it die? At least don't block the avenue for PAs who want more out of their career. 

The theme of the response from WAPA, IMO, is self preservationist in nature because, I will agree, that the DMS would fleece the PA flock to some degree. I still don't get the hooplah though. I still see it as a GOOD thing for PAs but who the hell am I?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Physician Assistant Forum! This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More