burnpac Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 more people signed the name change statement than voted in the last aapa election. more than twice as many and they actually stopped counting at 6200 because they had made their point: more folks care about our name than who runs our official organization. and those 6200 were not from the official aapa database. they were from grassroots efforts at places like the pa forum. This makes for a nice sound bite, but I'm not so sure your conclusions are valid and supportable. In my mind the two issues (i.e., voting in an election and grass roots activity) are not directly comparable, so making comparisons and inferences about level of support from those individual activities doesn't seem logical to me (I didn't say that it's not important!). Many, many more people always support professional organizations with their dues dollars than participate in the representative democracy avenues available to them in their organizations. Many more people also participate in grass roots activities / legislative campaigns sponsored by the AAPA than vote in AAPA elections. What do these facts mean? Maybe some of the more statistically inclined can comment on this. Here is an interesting fact that has always vexed me in California. More California PAs are members of AAPA than CAPA, which has never made sense to me considering the profound positive difference CAPA has made in professional PA practice in this state since 1976. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted February 21, 2012 Author Moderator Share Posted February 21, 2012 Here is an interesting fact that has always vexed me in California. More California PAs are members of AAPA than CAPA, which has never made sense to me considering the profound positive difference CAPA has made in professional PA practice in this state since 1976. I think many people have 1 professional organization paid for by their employers so they pick aapa. then if they are going to pay themselves for a second they join their specialty organization. I don't know that many folks who do all 3 although I know they are out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 I think many people have 1 professional organization paid for by their employers so they pick aapa. then if they are going to pay themselves for a second they join their specialty organization. I don't know that many folks who do all 3 although I know they are out there. It is still perplexing. PAs spend more annually at Starbucks that they do on dues for all three. Professional dues, as a percentage of PA income, have fallen precipitously in my thirty years of practice. It can't just be the money. This is very frustrating in trying to get things accomplished at the level that really matters to the trench PA and dramatically affects their day-to-day practice environment - state legislatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmj11 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 EMEPA, I agree about the specialty groups, I belong to two. Regarding the AAPA, I'm ready to rejoin. But I would like to know two things. One, that they would take the rank-n-file PAs seriously about the desire for a name change and two, that they would get out of the culture wars game. The last time I went to a HOD I was deeply disappointed. We PAs were in need of many things at the time, yet the HOD was consumed with culture war issues, right wing Vs left wing, Gay and Lesbians Vs the Evangelicals. While those issues raised are serious and should be debated, but the AAPA is not the forum for that. But that was the late 90s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Febrifuge Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 It is still perplexing. PAs spend more annually at Starbucks that they do on dues for all three. Professional dues, as a percentage of PA income, have fallen precipitously in my thirty years of practice. It can't just be the money. This is very frustrating in trying to get things accomplished at the level that really matters to the trench PA and dramatically affects their day-to-day practice environment - state legislatures. I am sympathetic to this point of view, and I see where it's a chicken-and-egg situation. People like me appreciate the value that has been provided by AAPA in the past, but (whether accurate or not) can't see a lot of relevant stuff going on right this minute. If more people like me joined up, maybe more of that would take place... but it can't unless the budget grows... but that won't happen until issues that are important to folks like myself become more front-and-center... on and on. Personally, on a smaller scale, I have something slightly similar. I'm a member of my specialty organization, and the state org is somewhat attractive to me, but dues are a little high if I'm not already an AAPA member, in which case I guess they're subsidized somehow. I need to pay dues myself (unless I get them rolled into the conference fee, like I did last year with SEMPA), so it's not like I can get the employer to pay one, then just do the other two on my own. Given the extra funds, I'd likely join my state org first, and address what I see as the most pressing issues -- which to me have to do with the professional title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdtpac Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Salary.com reported that the average PA salary was approximately $90,000 a year (with new graduates beginning at $78,000-$84,000 per year) that equated to approximately $44 per hour. Take the AAPA dues at $275 per year plus a state fee of approximately $150 per year the total equals $425 per year. Considering the average hourly wage that would mean the average PA would have to work 10 hours in order to support the organizations that are of the utmost importance in representing the needs of the profession and increasing/protecting their scope of practice. I find it very hard to fathom why any PA would not pay to protect those privileges based solely on the fact that they do not care for their profession's title. We do not have the numbers or the funds that the physicians or NP’s. The only way we are going to be able to do all the activities, including the public relations campaign that everyone wants, is for all 85,000 currently practicing PAs to join their state chapter and the AAPA. I think it is great to support the specialty organization but in the long run they can't help you as much as the other two organizations. It is time to stop the divisiveness and let's also start working together towards a common goal of securing the future of our profession. I always in my state and Academy dues, I challenge all of you to do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Hmmm...... "I find it very hard to fathom" why any seemingly intelligent person would attempt to MINIMIZE the reasons why MANY/LOTS/Thousands of PAs have steadily/consistently declined to renew their memberships with the AAPA to something as simple as a name change. ESPECIALLY when it is known that the decline in membership has been increasing LONG before the name change momentum picked up... But I guess thats the major "dis-connect" with the "Bureaucratic ally minded" and part of the conundrum... Part of the problem starts when you attempt to tell folks how much they make and then go on to instruct them on how they should spend their earnings. Again... more "paternalism" from the "ole school" that seems to repel the progressives and youngins... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Hmmm......"I find it very hard to fathom" why any seemingly intelligent person would attempt to MINIMIZE the reasons why MANY/LOTS/Thousands of PAs have steadily/consistently declined to renew their memberships with the AAPA to something as simple as a name change. ESPECIALLY when it is known that the decline in membership has been increasing LONG before the name change momentum picked up... But I guess thats the major "dis-connect" with the "Bureaucratic ally minded" and part of the conundrum... Part of the problem starts when you attempt to tell folks how much they make and then go on to instruct them on how they should spend their earnings. Again... more "paternalism" from the "ole school" that seems to repel the progressives and youngins... Actually Contrarian, you are on to something here and I agree with you. The demise of professional organizations at all levels has been going on for some time over decades. I think some of the confusion arises when proponents of the name change repeated declare here and on C1 that this is their reason for not supporting their professional organizations. I have never thought that this was the real reason, or valid. The new generations of PAs and other professionals have different wants, needs and desires, and organizations like the AAPA have to evolve into something different, or continue to decline. Things like annual conferences and state CMEs need to evolve into something different because the old models are not meeting the needs of the PA, and are competing with cheaper, faster, more accessible technologies. For most PAs (nearly half of all PAs currently practicing graduated in the last five years), life is good, and the don't remember or care about the struggles and battles that many "old school" PAs went through to create the modern practice environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Stephen- Perhaps we can't necessarily draw an apples-to-apples comparison between the average AAPA election turnout and the name change signatories. We all can acknowledge, however, that there is weight behind that statement of 6000+ supporters. It is disheartening that despite this groundswell of activity behind Associate, the only public response through an AAPA vehicle (which I have seen) has been some dismissive commentary in JAAPA and less than impartial poll questions. If there is more of a statement from the AAPA, please let me/us know b/c as a working PA who sees the usual PA press, I haven't seen it. Trust me, I'm not trying to get confrontational about it....it's more of a bewilderment about the lack of response. I understand your explanation about the role of the board vs the HOD in this process. We PAs WANT leadership on this, and the actions of the board- irrespective of their power over driving this issue- seems to be nothin more than kicking the can down the road. More to a point, I feel confident they were hoping it would just go away as it has in the past. I'd also like to add that it only serves to further the divide between old guard PAs/PA leadership and the incoming PAs of the future to take a stance such as "you guys are making great salaries with broad practice scope, which was acheived on our backs, and you don't recognize/appreciate it". As someone who has been so active in the political arena, you must appreciate that this is more a divisive remark than a unifying one. If the AAPA wants a broader base of support, they will certainly have to reconcile their purpose into what they see as the profession's needs and the desires of the entire consticuency. It seems lke this is what you are saying in your last post, no? Despite the contention over these issues on this forum, I appreciate you coming here to offer some AAPA prespective. Matt member- AAPA, WAPA, APACVS, STS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted February 22, 2012 Author Moderator Share Posted February 22, 2012 Steve- I do appreciate your input here although we disagree on the name change issue. I do continue to be an aapa member/dfaapa as well as currently serving on the board of my specialty organization. I don't think name change is the only issue in the pa world today but it is a major one(perhaps THE major one) and needs to be addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Stephen- Perhaps we can't necessarily draw an apples-to-apples comparison between the average AAPA election turnout and the name change signatories. We all can acknowledge, however, that there is weight behind that statement of 6000+ supporters. It is disheartening that despite this groundswell of activity behind Associate, the only public response through an AAPA vehicle (which I have seen) has been some dismissive commentary in JAAPA and less than impartial poll questions. If there is more of a statement from the AAPA, please let me/us know b/c as a working PA who sees the usual PA press, I haven't seen it. Trust me, I'm not trying to get confrontational about it....it's more of a bewilderment about the lack of response. I understand your explanation about the role of the board vs the HOD in this process. We PAs WANT leadership on this, and the actions of the board- irrespective of their power over driving this issue- seems to be nothin more than kicking the can down the road. More to a point, I feel confident they were hoping it would just go away as it has in the past. I'd also like to add that it only serves to further the divide between old guard PAs/PA leadership and the incoming PAs of the future to take a stance such as "you guys are making great salaries with broad practice scope, which was acheived on our backs, and you don't recognize/appreciate it". As someone who has been so active in the political arena, you must appreciate that this is more a divisive remark than a unifying one. If the AAPA wants a broader base of support, they will certainly have to reconcile their purpose into what they see as the profession's needs and the desires of the entire consticuency. It seems lke this is what you are saying in your last post, no? Despite the contention over these issues on this forum, I appreciate you coming here to offer some AAPA prespective. Matt member- AAPA, WAPA, APACVS, STS Matt, I hear you and understand. Contrarian is right about the bureaucratic nature of the Academy. It is what we built it to be over four decades and now we have to change to survive. However, the bigger and older the organization, the more difficult it is to change and adapt. I truly believe that the present BOD / staff want to change and adapt, but it takes time. The AAPA is a very different organization than it was ten years ago, and I'm hopeful that the new CEO can continue the culture of change and adaptation. As to context of the the comment that the new generation doesn't have the appreciation of the road traveled, I realize that I'm starting to sound more like my father everyday! I meant the comment in the vein of an observation of resigned reality, and we can't use this as reason to dismiss apathy or indifference. Where we are going as a profession is much more important than where we have been. Please read and understand it in that context. We also have to face the reality that the future of professional organizations will look nothing like it did ten years ago. As the new generation of medical professional wants, needs and preferences evolve, organizations that don't adapt will cease to exist. Thanks for being involved, and I enjoy the collegial discourse here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Stephen... I agree with all that you posted above... EXCEPT for your use of MY name in this open forum. If I wanted it to be used... I would have posted it...!!! (as you have done with yours). Stephen/MODS... please remove...!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Stephen...I agree with all that you posted above... EXCEPT for your use of MY name in this open forum. If I wanted it to be used... I would have posted it...!!! (as you have done with yours). Stephen/MODS... please remove...!!! Contrarian - References to your first name removed. I did it to make a point, after you made such an issue of it with my friend John and rubbed his nose in it. You think that you are hiding behind the veneer of anonymity on this and other forums, but you have posted more than enough personal information that in about ninety seconds of google research, I had your name, address, phone, e-mail, etc. It wasn't difficult at all. In this day and age, anonymity is an illusion. My apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 EMEPA, I agree about the specialty groups, I belong to two. Regarding the AAPA, I'm ready to rejoin. But I would like to know two things. One, that they would take the rank-n-file PAs seriously about the desire for a name change and two, that they would get out of the culture wars game. The last time I went to a HOD I was deeply disappointed. We PAs were in need of many things at the time, yet the HOD was consumed with culture war issues, right wing Vs left wing, Gay and Lesbians Vs the Evangelicals. While those issues raised are serious and should be debated, but the AAPA is not the forum for that. But that was the late 90s. jmj - I'm chuckling to myself as I came into the House as a young delegate from CA in the '90s, and remember well the debates you reference. The House is more sedate in this day and age because much of the policy on controversial issues has been made. I was also Speaker of the House 2003-05. In fact, by charter and bylaws, the AAPA's HOD is the forum for these issues. Can we really call ourselves "professionals" if we don't care about public health, reproductive issues, child safety, smoking, substance abuse, health disparities and equities, etc., etc.? I have always said that having no policy is a policy. What goes on outside of the confines of an exam room is indeed integral to the health and well being of the patients we care for, and our communities. Caring about these issues, and having policies on them, is paramount in my opinion to considering ourselves health professionals. As for #1, all I can say is change is coming. Likely not fast enough for some, but the writing is on the wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdtpac Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Hmmm......"Part of the problem starts when you attempt to tell folks how much they make and then go on to instruct them on how they should spend their earnings". Again... more "paternalism" from the "ole school" that seems to repel the progressives and youngins... Contrarian, You certainly have chosen the appropriate moniker to identify yourself on this forum. Many of your comments are contrary to most of these posts and you most always put a negative interpretation or twist on others comments. I was not trying to "instruct" anyone on how to spend their money. What I was trying to point out was the value and benefit of supporting our professional organizations was infinitesimal to the incomes that most of us enjoy because our professional organizations have work so hard to secure our future and improve our scope of practice. Furthermore, much of the displeasure expressed on this forum has been in regards to a perceived notion that the AAPA has done a poor job in the public relations department of promoting our profession to the docs,nurses,other providers and especially our patients so they may have a better understanding of what we do as health care providers. This has also been tied into the issue of our title. You want exposure to the public, you have to pay for it! Currently the Academy does not have the funds to develop and broadcasts a public relations campaign comparable to the docs or nurses. You want that kind of visibility to the public, it is going to take the financial support of every PA so the Academy can create and distribute a public address announcement and still provide the other valuable services to its members. You want to twist my/our words to support your own agenda, so be it….. ready to move on to the next topic….. what do you want to argue about now….. we are ready whenever you are! You might want to take a less than from Stephen, andersenpa andEMEDPA and note how they dialogue with one another, very collegial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted February 22, 2012 Author Moderator Share Posted February 22, 2012 You want exposure to the public, you have to pay for it! Currently the Academy does not have the funds to develop and broadcasts a public relations campaign comparable to the docs or nurses. You want that kind of visibility to the public, it is going to take the financial support of every PA so the Academy can create and distribute a public address announcement and still provide the other valuable services to its members. . I would welcome the following statement from the AAPA printed on our dues statement: The AAPA is considering the launch of a major PR campaign to educate the american public about pa's through TV, radio, and print media outlets. We need to raise 5 million dollars(or whatever) to accomplish this. Please consider including an additional amount with your dues for this purpose(followed by checkboxes for 25, 50, 100, 250, 1000 dollars or other amt). if we do not reach our goal of 5 million dollars please check here if you would like your money returned or used to benefit student scholarships. I think you would be surprised how many people would send in money for something like this. One of the primary goals of the aapa should be to support/promote the profession by making us known to the average american on the street. in my 20+ years as an aapa member I have yet to see them do this. That is not to say that there are not other things they do very well but this should be at the core of their mission statement; The AAPA will seek to promote the PA profession to all Americans". I was at a gathering recently and met some new folks(intelligent, college educated, etc) and found out after the fact that they all thought I was a "production assistant" for some emergency TV show or movie because when people ask I say I am an "emergency medicine pa". in 2012 the average colege graduate in america should know what a pa is and we should not have to say " it's like a nurse practitioner" for them to understand the concept. I work in one of the best pa states in the country and yet no one outside of former military folks has any idea what a pa is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Contrarian - References to your first name removed. I did it to make a point, after you made such an issue of it with my friend John and rubbed his nose in it.... [brevity edit]... In this day and age, anonymity is an illusion. My apologies. Wow... So rather than "stay on topic" and "keep the conversation civil"... your response in this thread was simply to play "Captain Save-a-*@%"...??? Ummm... There is NO trying to "hide" here... I'm just NOT silly enough to post my name out in the open on forums for all to see. As I stated in the other thread, I a fully aware that background info can be gathered... the point is to NOT simply hand it to them and to make them work for it. Apparently neither YOU nor "your friend John" get it. See... I didn't post your or "your friend John's" names here or elsewhere. You guys did, and are free to continue to do so. As a reminder... Your friend John tried to make our previous discussion somehow about "being a man." Somehow he confused posting ones name on a open internet forum... full of free opinions... with "man-ing up" (probably the meds). So please don't continue to get it twisted. As to getting back to the "Topic of discussion" here in this thread... Jtdpac... I think we all get the concept that advertising costs money... and a name change costs money... and just about anything else done by the academy costs money. Making the declaration that 'advertising costs money'... as if most here don't have the capacity to understand that... is really condesending and part of the problem. It also reveals much about your perception of the readers here. Some of the contention seems to be stemming from the notion that the "ole school leadership" thinks its ok to dictate/determine if the issues are even worth the time or effort/money... without the input of the "commoners." The idea seems to be 'join us (AAPA)... send us your membership dollars... send us your CME money... then go away... and WE will tell you what WE want to spend it on'...!!!! 'Cause of course WE know whats good for you... much better than YOU are capable of... cause we be PAs fo a long time'... and struggled/toiled to get PAs where they are today!!! [blah...blah... blah... charlie brown's teacher] Then its all justified with declarations about how much "Starbucks" we drink (I don't like the flavor of, therefore don't drink coffee products) or with assumptions about how much money we make... and why in their opinion we should simply give them a portion of it... because they know whats good for the profession. Yeah... more about you ole dudes from the academy 'talking at us instead of to us'... more about listening to the real issues, concerns of the average PA instead of simply waiting for a pause in the conversation so that you can tell us why we are clearly, errant/mistaken and wrong and why YOU know better. Yeah... more of the same... and likely part of the reasons why AAPA membership rolls is starting to look like a "ghost town"... or better yet... "Myspace." Then again... you guys with all the answers still can't seem to figure out why just about ALL PA students join the AAPA while in school... then most fall off the membership books by the time their 1st PANRE comes around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Contrarian - You can dish it but you sure can't take it. Rant on, as I'm sure you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Naaah... Just find it amusing that you felt the need to try and defend "your friend John" and in the process completely missed the POINT of the prvious conversation. Which again... was: Being a "Man" has nothing to do with being silly enough to post your name on a open forum... and NOTHING at all to do with joining the AAPA. Curious though... Weren't BOTH of you two there (intimately involved in the workings and direction of the AAPA) during the largest decline in membership...??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Febrifuge Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Guys, the discussion has been nice and collegial, and might even lead somewhere someday. Could we all agree to take a step back? PRO TIP: if a post is not just a response to someone's points, but spends significant space to talk ABOUT that person, even (or especially) to that person, then consider the virtue of just not posting it. This is how threads get closed by the moderators. Please don't do anything that other people might need to moderate for you. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I would welcome the following statement from the AAPA printed on our dues statement:The AAPA is considering the launch of a major PR campaign to educate the american public about pa's through TV, radio, and print media outlets. We need to raise 5 million dollars(or whatever) to accomplish this. Please consider including an additional amount with your dues for this purpose(followed by checkboxes for 25, 50, 100, 250, 1000 dollars or other amt). if we do not reach our goal of 5 million dollars please check here if you would like your money returned or used to benefit student scholarships. I think you would be surprised how many people would send in money for something like this. One of the primary goals of the aapa should be to support/promote the profession by making us known to the average american on the street. in my 20+ years as an aapa member I have yet to see them do this. That is not to say that there are not other things they do very well but this should be at the core of their mission statement; The AAPA will seek to promote the PA profession to all Americans". I was at a gathering recently and met some new folks(intelligent, college educated, etc) and found out after the fact that they all thought I was a "production assistant" for some emergency TV show or movie because when people ask I say I am an "emergency medicine pa". in 2012 the average colege graduate in america should know what a pa is and we should not have to say " it's like a nurse practitioner" for them to understand the concept. I work in one of the best pa states in the country and yet no one outside of former military folks has any idea what a pa is. I think that this idea has merit, and very similar to PAF and PAC monies being collected and earmarked for specific tasks with dues renewal. I certainly would contribute to PR earmarked monies. You need to cut the AAPA a little slack on the PA promotion front. In my opinion, they have done a good job with the resources at their disposal. There are over 300,000,000 people residing in the US, and hundreds of major media markets. The stark reality and environment in which we currently live is that you could take the entire annual AAPA budget and spend it on PR related activities and not make a microscopic dent in public awareness of PAs. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try. I became a PA in 1981 if you want to talk about lack of recognition and confusion. Now, PAs and their contribution are well known in my community, due to the shear numbers of PAs in the health care work force here. We will soon breach 100,000 clinically practicing PAs in the US, and the public's awareness of PAs will continue to expand. I don't doubt your experience with PA knowledge and awareness, I'm just putting it into historical perspective and sharing my perspective. I would be happy to support (with cash) PR earmarks at dues renewal or any other time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueridge Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 From an editorial in yesterday’s New York Times (paragraph 6), "Virtually all experts agree that primary care physicians and their assistants are the key to coordinating patient care in our disjointed health care system.” Vague, but I am guessing that the author meant PAs when writing the word assistants, but who knows, maybe not. If the AAPA supported the title/name change, then a window would be open to write a letter to the editor briefly stating what a PA is and noting the reason to transition toward a new title, physician associate. Free. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/opinion/a-real-doc-fix.html?scp=6&sq=physicians&st=cse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 From an editorial in yesterday’s New York Times (paragraph 6), "Virtually all experts agree that primary care physicians and their assistants are the key to coordinating patient care in our disjointed health care system.” Vague, but I am guessing that the author meant PAs when writing the word assistants, but who knows, maybe not. If the AAPA supported the title/name change, then a window would be open to write a letter to the editor briefly stating what a PA is and noting the reason to transition toward a new title, physician associate. Free. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/opinion/a-real-doc-fix.html?scp=6&sq=physicians&st=cse Blueridge - We don't need to wait for the title change for this kind of activity, and the AAPA has already been doing this for years. All media sources are combed 24/7 for mentions of PAs (or places PAs should be mentioned), and the Communications department uses it as a way to formally educate reporters, publications, etc. re: PAs. More than that, the AAPA has an active program to proactively educate health care reporters at every opportunity. While I was president (and before and after me), every trip to Washington included at least a couple of meetings with health care journalists from the WSJ, Time, Newsweek, NYT, Washington Post, and may others for the purpose of bringing the reporter up to speed on PAs and their contributions to the health care system. This has resulted in good press for PAs, espcially during the lead up to passage of the ACA, but we obviously have much more work to do. I have sent this story to AAPA Communications, and they have likely already seen it due to their monitoring processes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueridge Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 burnpac- I understand that the AAPA has been doing this kind of thing for years. However, if the AAPA does change course on the title change, this could easily be included in letters to editors, which would provide more lasting impact in the minds of the readers in relation to general understanding of PAs. I am of the persuasion that unless the connotative definition of “assistant" changes, the issue of educating the general public about PAs will be everlasting (generational). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdtpac Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Naaah...Just find it amusing that you felt the need to try and defend "your friend John" and in the process completely missed the POINT of the prvious conversation. Which again... was: Being a "Man" has nothing to do with being silly enough to post your name on a open forum... and NOTHING at all to do with joining the AAPA. Curious though... Weren't BOTH of you two there (intimately involved in the workings and direction of the AAPA) during the largest decline in membership...??? Contrarian, When I asked you to a “Man Up” it had nothing to do with asking you to identify yourself on the forum. You did that on your own by twisting and misinterpreting what I was trying to say. Let me remind you of my comment to you on the previous posts: I will conclude by asking you to "Man up, Contrarian" and please pardon me if I paraphrase from the late JFK’s inaugural address:" Ask not what YOUR Academy has done for you, ask what you have done for YOUR Academy". Rephrased, I was asking you (and implying to others on these threads) what can you or have you done for the Academy to better the profession rather than continually attacking the Academy for what you perceive as non-action on their part. This is OUR profession, we all need to take responsibility and do our part to make sure we ALL promote and secure the future of our profession. As we are still a relatively young and small profession compared to others within the healthcare fields, it is in our best interest work with rather than against the Academy. I agree with Febrifuge, let's get back on point, be a little more collegial, professional and maybe we can at least agree to disagree on each other's opinions. With that said I like to address your reference to declining membership in the Academy. Yes, I was on the Academy's Board of Directors as our membership declined. The board, our committees and the Academy staff had and have been working very hard to try to determine not only why we are not getting new graduates to join but also addressing renewals of fellow members. There are many factors contributing to this decline in membership and not just simply because our constituents were disenchanted with their professional title or any perceived non-action on that particular issue. If you may recall, the biggest decline in the Academy's membership was the result of the NCCPA taking the logging of CME away from the Academy. And to address the question on this thread - YES I am, as I continually have for almost 40 years, supporting the Academy in 2012. Any chance you might reconsider? BTW - I don't need any one’s help defending my opinions, I think I do fairly good job of doing that myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.