Jump to content

The Benefits of Changing our Title -- The Time is NOW!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 204
  • Created
  • Last Reply
19 minutes ago, B694515 said:

Juvenile, but hey you're the one that wants to change their job title as if it would make a difference.  Physician Assistant, associate, Jr. Doctor, Doctor of Physician Assistant, or what have you...it doesn't change a thing.  Just saying.

So, you're from the Student Doctor Network you say...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2018 at 10:42 AM, lkth487 said:

Why not something like DMP (doctor of medical practice) or DMS (doctor of medical science), if the objective is a perceived equivalency with the DNP degree?  

I recommend DMS (Doctor of Medical Science) because there are already programs like Lynchburg. It sounds good, makes sense. 

Jane Doe, Medical Practitioner, DMS

 "Doctor of Science in Physician Assistant Studies" is probably the worst/most confusing name ever. 

https://www.mcphs.edu/academics/school-of-physician-assistant-studies/physician-assistant/physican-assistant-studies-doctor-of-science

That's why I think the name change has to come first before the doctorate...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, PACali said:

I recommend DMS (Doctor of Medical Science) because there are already programs like Lynchburg. It sounds good, makes sense. 

Jane Doe, Medical Practitioner, DMS

 "Doctor of Science in Physician Assistant Studies" is probably the worst/most confusing name ever. 

https://www.mcphs.edu/academics/school-of-physician-assistant-studies/physician-assistant/physican-assistant-studies-doctor-of-science

That's why I think the name change has to come first before the doctorate...

Agreed. 

I also think it would be an easier transition to go from Medical Practitioner to Doctor of Medical Science, than Physician Assistant to Doctor of Medical Science. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, PACali said:

I recommend DMS (Doctor of Medical Science) because there are already programs like Lynchburg. It sounds good, makes sense. 

Jane Doe, Medical Practitioner, DMS

 "Doctor of Science in Physician Assistant Studies" is probably the worst/most confusing name ever. 

https://www.mcphs.edu/academics/school-of-physician-assistant-studies/physician-assistant/physican-assistant-studies-doctor-of-science

That's why I think the name change has to come first before the doctorate...

And now I have a new 10-year goal. :D  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

With AAPA elections coming up does anyone know what candidates are FOR a name change? 

On a different note, with all the talk of a national campaign advertising for PAs, I wanted to reiterate that one of the reasons I started this thread was because if we were to actually adopt a name change (hopefully something significant like Medical Practitioner) we would not only get rid of "assistant" but a name change of an entire profession would get its own publicity and could act as a catalyst for a livelier campaign to advocate for our profession. 

Just some thought.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, corpsman89 said:

With AAPA elections coming up does anyone know what candidates are FOR a name change? 

On a different note, with all the talk of a national campaign advertising for PAs, I wanted to reiterate that one of the reasons I started this thread was because if we were to actually adopt a name change (hopefully something significant like Medical Practitioner) we would not only get rid of "assistant" but a name change of an entire profession would get its own publicity and could act as a catalyst for a livelier campaign to advocate four our profession. 

Just some thought.  

David Mittman is running for President-Elect, and seems to be pro-title change. He worked on the push for OTP and overall looks to be a great candidate to continue driving the profession forward. 

 https://www.aapa.org/about/aapa-governance-leadership/board-of-directors/aapa-election/david-mittman/

Beth Smolko is a candidate for Director-At-Large that also seems to be on board for a professional title change. 

https://www.aapa.org/about/aapa-governance-leadership/board-of-directors/aapa-election/beth-smolko/

James Cannon as well, who is also running for Director-At-Large. He seems to be a solid candidate, though I have seen that there is some reticence among some PAs due to his recent service with and close relationship to the NCCPA. On most issues though, he seems solid.   

https://www.aapa.org/about/aapa-governance-leadership/board-of-directors/aapa-election/james-cannon/

Unfortunately, many of the other candidates are less vocal on how they feel about that issue, at least in their election bio. 

 

Edited to add: David Jackson, the other candidate for President-Elect, answered a question on the Huddle yesterday about his thoughts on a title change. In short (and to paraphrase), he is open to a title-change, but thinks it  "is imperative" to keep the PA initials. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ProSpectre said:

 

Edited to add: David Jackson, the other candidate for President-Elect, answered a question on the Huddle yesterday about his thoughts on a title change. In short (and to paraphrase), he is open to a title-change, but thinks it  "is imperative" to keep the PA initials. 

I would take this to mean that David Jackson is NOT really in support of name change, but just basically acknowledging it to satisfy the PA camp who wants name change?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, corpsman89 said:

I would take this to mean that David Jackson is NOT really in support of name change, but just basically acknowledging it to satisfy the PA camp who wants name change?

Yes, I was trying to be objective in my post, but that is how it appears to me as well. 

This is the question posed, along with David Jackson's answer in full (his response in italics):

  1. What is your position on title change for the profession and how does OTP influence your view on the use of the word "assistant" in our title vs. a title that reflects PA's practice of medicine? I do not like our title. I don't think it accurately reflects the education and care delivered by PAs.  If the profession is to consider a title change, I think it is imperative to keep the initial "PA".  We have worked over fifty years to establish our profession and be included in enabling legislation.  I don't know what a better title should be.  If we are to consider a title change, I think it would be wise to first study the issue and elucidate all the factors that would need to be considered.

 

Dave Mittman states on his AAPA elections page: 

"Certainly, in a state that passes OTP, the PAs will be asked 'Who do you assist?' 'You may need to change your title as it is now misleading'. I am not sure what our new title should be and would commission a Task Force or Ad Hoc Committee to work with a public relations firm to look at this problem and give us a fair assessment of the options we have. I would also pass the results of this work by our membership, keeping you well informed throughout. It is time to look closely at a problem we have failed to look at for many years. We have “kicked the can” to the next group of leaders on this long enough."

While their answers at first glance appear similar, David Jackson speaks in the tone of "if" a title change is pursued, while Dave Mittman outright states that he will pursue this and that it needs to happen for OTP to move forward. One seems more likely to "kick the can" than the other. I think the difference is subtle, but clear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
3 hours ago, corpsman89 said:

Since there are two "Daves" running for president, it may be important they we clarify which "Dave" we are talking about. Are you speaking of David Mittman? 

I guarantee he means Dave Mittman. I also know him and he will not disappoint on launching this profession forward.

I also am voting Dave Mittman, Beth Smolko, and James Cannon.

Furthermore, Dave Jackson has the support of James Carney of Rhode Island, who was viciously against everything OTP and title change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having worked with both Davids while on the AAPA Board of Directors, Mittman will pursue OTP with enthusiasm. He both understands and clearly articulates why a title change will need to be a part of that. He has my unequivocal support for President.

Beth Smolko, is the original author of the OTP resolution and brings an excellent background to the Board. She will continue to pursue advancement of the profession if reelected to the board.

Knowing James, he will also enthusiastically pursue a OTP and address the title issue. His CV is candidly, the best of any of the candidates running for a Director at Large position. I know some have expressed concern with his previous time on the NCCPA board and his continued support as they work through the PANRE evolution trial. To those individuals I would suggest looking at the issues as a matter of triage.

The most prevalent and profession defining issues before the AAPA right now are OTP and a title change. James will support both. The AAPA does not have the resources to support three divergent initiatives at this time. You can win a two front war, adding a third front is a recipe for disaster.; ask Napoleon and Hitler. The research being conducted by the Rand corp is going to take time, and pushes the time horizon to reevaluate the NCCPA issue out another two years. Coupled with the changing dynamics of the board composition in the past year, the votes are simply not there; it is no longer a one vote difference. A term on the BOD is two years, Cannon is an excellent candidate to push OTP and a title change forward in the next two years, you can reevaluate after that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2018 at 10:42 AM, lkth487 said:

Why not something like DMP (doctor of medical practice) or DMS (doctor of medical science), if the objective is a perceived equivalency with the DNP degree?  

I personally think the answer is the DMSc, a doctorate that is granted alongside a defined post graduate residency (i.e. Lynchburg). In regards to medicine it would be the difference between a PhD and PsyD in pysch. The MD is the gold standard for clinical practice and research, and the DMSc is the standard for clinical practice. Tie this to taking Step 3 at the state level for independent practice.

It would also short circuit the NP movement for further encroachment into independent practice in other states. You can go to legislatures with the argument that all clinicians should meet the same basic requirement to practice independently, which is Step 3 for physicians. The way NP education is currently structured, few would be able to pass, and would I believe provide the impetus for NP education to be standardized.

This argument could be put forward in the 23 states that NPs have independent practice as well when PAs are lobbying for OTP if the medical societies would get on board.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
20 hours ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

I guarantee he means Dave Mittman. I also know him and he will not disappoint on launching this profession forward.

I also am voting Dave Mittman, Beth Smolko, and James Cannon.

Furthermore, Dave Jackson has the support of James Carney of Rhode Island, who was viciously against everything OTP and title change. 

Agree- I know Mittman, Beth, and James personally and will vote for all 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, CorpsmanUP said:

I personally think the answer is the DMSc, a doctorate that is granted alongside a defined post graduate residency (i.e. Lynchburg). In regards to medicine it would be the difference between a PhD and PsyD in pysch. The MD is the gold standard for clinical practice and research, and the DMSc is the standard for clinical practice. Tie this to taking Step 3 at the state level for independent practice.

It would also short circuit the NP movement for further encroachment into independent practice in other states. You can go to legislatures with the argument that all clinicians should meet the same basic requirement to practice independently, which is Step 3 for physicians. The way NP education is currently structured, few would be able to pass, and would I believe provide the impetus for NP education to be standardized.

This argument could be put forward in the 23 states that NPs have independent practice as well when PAs are lobbying for OTP if the medical societies would get on board.

 

 

You need Step 1 and 2 before 3.  They test different things, and I believe they are all important.    I support PAs taking the STEPS (and then applying to physician residencies if they so choose), but it should be all three.  You can skip the CS part of Step 2, since it's pretty useless, but I think the rest should continue to be required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, lkth487 said:

You need Step 1 and 2 before 3.  They test different things, and I believe they are all important.    I support PAs taking the STEPS (and then applying to physician residencies if they so choose), but it should be all three.  You can skip the CS part of Step 2, since it's pretty useless, but I think the rest should continue to be required.

Step 2 CS uses standardized patients to test medical students and graduates on their ability to gather information from patients, perform physical examinations, and communicate their findings to patients and colleagues.

Yes, I agree with the above as we do this daily (as a PA, not a physician), but I would be curious to hear from others that went PA to MD/DO if the info. gathering, PE, etc is taught the same (I would assume it is). I know we were taught in the same manner as the MD students during my schooling, but that might not be true for every school. Also, most of the students in my class studied a lot from step 2 CK which I still have that book and look at it hear and there.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, camoman1234 said:

Step 2 CS uses standardized patients to test medical students and graduates on their ability to gather information from patients, perform physical examinations, and communicate their findings to patients and colleagues.

 

It's an English language exam.

 

Designed for FMGs to make sure they can communicate in English.  It's completely unnecessary for US graduates.  Costs a ridiculous amount too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 8:46 PM, ProSpectre said:

I agree that a name change is an important step for the advancement of the profession, but one common rebuke I often hear is the challenge/cost of changing the legislation in every state that refers to "physician assistant" specifically. Is this a valid concern, or is there a workaround wherein a document could be drafted that changes the title and retroactively applies to all other instances of the physician assistant name in legislation? Or is it something that will need to be supported by the AAPA HOD, and then slowly changed state by state?

For what it's worth, I think Physician Associate is the easiest transition if we are to keep the same initials, but I prefer Medical Practitioner as the option most descriptive of what we do. 


This may show up again later in this chain, but.....

I am working with a small group of PAs in Colorado to get our laws and rules changed.  We have the support of the state medical society, and some legislators. 

There are some states that are submitting a title change resolution to AAPA this year--but it appears it is to create a task force to look into the ramifications of a title change. 

I have proposed to the State of Colorado that a simple sentence be put into the legislation:  "The terms physician assistant, PA, physician associate or any title approved by the AAPA shall be interchangeable."

  Main reason for this:  Colorado PA laws have not had a significant upgrade since originally written in 1983.  If we are able to get the Optimal Team Practice legislation through, an official title change will not require a major overhaul of the legislation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 0:38 AM, ProSpectre said:

I still think the name change should be a sooner-rather-than-later thing; PAs have been writing about & debating this since the early 90's -- it's time. But I don't disagree with your above point; it just never occurred to me that it was uncommon to see PAs represented on hospital websites. I did find a couple after a quick search (I cheated a little though, by going to the hospitals that have a respected EM PA residency in house): 

Duke University Hospital: https://www.dukehealth.org/locations/duke-university-hospital-emergency-room 

University of Iowa ER (well they list the specific PAs on the care team): https://uihc.org/emergency-department 

 

Of your options listed above, PIMP is the clear winner. Instant respect right there. But you know what they say though, PIMPin' ain't easy. 

But think about the students--the true future of the profession.  How do you tell your parents, family, and or SO that you are heading to PIMP school?  Or getting a master's degree as a PIMP?

Just a comment--the title discussion goes back well before the early 1990, and a change to associate would go back closer to the roots;

Date: November 11, 1972 (from https://medspace.mc.duke.edu/american-academy-physicians-associates-unapproved-minutes-board-meeting)
Description: Unapproved minutes of the American Academy of Physician's Associates' Board of Directors meeting held November 11, 1972 at George Washington University, Washington, DC.  Items discussed included:  (1) the Academy and Association jointly approaching the Office of Education to voice concerns since the AMA's past hesitancy to involve "educators of physician's assistants as well as graduate PAs in the program of accreditation," (2) need to voice opposition to American Hospital and American Medical Association draft policy that hospitals nor hospital based physicians should hire PAs, and appointment of AMA advisory committee on PAs to the Council on Health Manpower with no representation from PA educators or graduate PAs.  Dr. Thomas Piemme provided information about meeting he and Dr. Alfred Sadler had with directors of the American Association of Colleges.  Dr. Donald Detmer presented his ideas about the Academy's publication, requested the name be changed to the PA Journal, and was approved to be the editor of the new Journal beginning with the April 1973 issue. Mr. Roy Snell, secretary of the American College of Physician's Assistants, provided background information on the College.  Once he left the meeting, discussion was held on the pros and cons of merging the Academy and the College.  The Board approved the "principles of a merger with the American College of Physician's Assistants" with details to be worked out through negotiations. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 10:23 AM, EMEDPA said:

I went to PA school I n the early 90s and the common wisdom was that within 10 years we would have both a name change to physician associate and a bridge program with no mcat to become physicians. well, 1/2 right I guess, but in reverse order expected...we do need to the rid of the assistant in our title. Historically and to be in line with our colleagues in the UK, Physician Associate makes the most sense, but I can understand concerns about keeping physician in the name. I can't say I know the answer at this point, only can say a name change is needed as we are no one's assistants and the name is dragging us down on every front.

I was part of the UK pilot program introducing the PA concept in that country.  There were 12 of us Americans, and all of us (were) founding members of UKAPA.  Because it was a group of Americans, the original title was UK Association of Physician Assistants (those of us that wanted associate were outvoted 9-3).  Several years later, the Royal College of General Practitioners (UK equivalent of AAFP) recommended the change to Associate.

One cool thing for us--The Royal College of Physicians-Edinburgh allowed us to join as permanent associate members (most associate members are medical students).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 10:20 PM, CorpsmanUP said:

Having worked with both Davids while on the AAPA Board of Directors, Mittman will pursue OTP with enthusiasm. He both understands and clearly articulates why a title change will need to be a part of that. He has my unequivocal support for President.

Beth Smolko, is the original author of the OTP resolution and brings an excellent background to the Board. She will continue to pursue advancement of the profession if reelected to the board.

Knowing James, he will also enthusiastically pursue a OTP and address the title issue. His CV is candidly, the best of any of the candidates running for a Director at Large position. I know some have expressed concern with his previous time on the NCCPA board and his continued support as they work through the PANRE evolution trial. To those individuals I would suggest looking at the issues as a matter of triage.

The most prevalent and profession defining issues before the AAPA right now are OTP and a title change. James will support both. The AAPA does not have the resources to support three divergent initiatives at this time. You can win a two front war, adding a third front is a recipe for disaster.; ask Napoleon and Hitler. The research being conducted by the Rand corp is going to take time, and pushes the time horizon to reevaluate the NCCPA issue out another two years. Coupled with the changing dynamics of the board composition in the past year, the votes are simply not there; it is no longer a one vote difference. A term on the BOD is two years, Cannon is an excellent candidate to push OTP and a title change forward in the next two years, you can reevaluate after that. 

Dave M not only is in favor of and supportive of OTP, I believe he is fully in favor of a title change.  He led a group of PA leaders (a "name change committee) to get the title change on the AAPA 2012 survey.  When the HOD didn't act on the results of the survey, Dave M founded PAs for Tomorrow--all members of that "name change committee" are charter members of PAFT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • 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