Jump to content

What happened at AAPA elections??


Recommended Posts

I am surprised no one has suggested she just gave up on trying to help a profession that ignores best practice for future. Maybe she couldn’t get past that HOD chose to ignore the fact of MCP best title for future. Not that it was her choice, but best based on research.  Maybe, just like indicted on report, she didn’t want to deal with the hassle of poor title choice knowing it will be a struggle and take away from time and effort to OTP, as it will raise more of a stink from physicians, who you still need, more so than MCP would have. Maybe she realized there are to many ostriches within HOD and AAPA. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Hope2PA said:

I am surprised no one has suggested she just gave up on trying to help a profession that ignores best practice for future. Maybe she couldn’t get past that HOD chose to ignore the fact of MCP best title for future. Not that it was her choice, but best based on research.  Maybe, just like indicted on report, she didn’t want to deal with the hassle of poor title choice knowing it will be a struggle and take away from time and effort to OTP, as it will raise more of a stink from physicians, who you still need, more so than MCP would have. Maybe she realized there are to many ostriches within HOD and AAPA. 

Nah... If I was pres and decided to resign because I had huge issues I'd publish a manifesto about it on my way out the door. What is the point of the grand gesture if nobody knows you made it?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2021 at 12:21 AM, PACali said:

Maybe she is not pro-title change? Or the institution where she works is against the title change?

The moniker of "Physician Associate" has been applied to Yale affiliated PAs for well over 30 + years. I know this as I worked at both YMS and Yale-New Haven Hospital  titled a "Physician Associate" starting in 1988.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, CAdamsPAC said:

The moniker of "Physician Associate" has been applied to Yale affiliated PAs for well over 30 + years. I know this as I worked at both YMS and Yale-New Haven Hospital  titled a "Physician Associate" starting in 1988.

My mistake. I didn’t realize any state legally used title Physician Associate. Actual degree of Associate doesn’t allow one to use that title. Many states specifically require Physician Assistant to be visible. Doubt they care if you have Masters as Physician Associate, master medical science or Assistant, still can only legally be an assistant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2021 at 11:30 AM, Hope2PA said:

My mistake. I didn’t realize any state legally used title Physician Associate. Actual degree of Associate doesn’t allow one to use that title. Many states specifically require Physician Assistant to be visible. Doubt they care if you have Masters as Physician Associate, master medical science or Assistant, still can only legally be an assistant.

Why do you feel compelled to apologize? The label Physician Associate is "a Yale thing", no where else in my 30 years of PA practice in CT was the label used! To be labeled  as a "Physician Associate" one must be a graduate of an accredited Physician Assistant School, Certified by the NCCPA and have a State of Connecticut Physician Assistant License!! We as a profession must stop being so ready to apologize and grovel especially when not in error.

Edited by CAdamsPAC
spelling error
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
4 hours ago, TWR said:

Getting off topic with some of the answers.  Why was a duly ELECTED president not seated?  Why is the BOD so hush hush?  We all deserve to know what happened. She was voted in to be President!!!!!!

Whatever happened, it looks like there are hard feelings. She scrubbed any mention of AAPA off her LinkedIn page, and she has been affiliated a while. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well PAFT sent a letter to the current AAPA leadership  asking for some clarification and asking for transparency. We will see if we get any response.

My best guesstimation is something big happened and everyone is being very quiet under advice of counsel. If that is the case they should just say... for legal reasons we cannot comment. It isn't the best answer and will probably fuel more speculation but it is, at least, some kind of answer.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
3 hours ago, ventana said:

freedom of information request - fight legal with legal??  PAFT??

PAFT sent a demand letter for an explanation. It was ignored other than Dianne herself asking who told us she was removed from the board. It was a word choice more than a declaration or actual belief she was removed. It was the only response we received from anyone.

Whatever it is...I think we can assume its pretty bad in some fashion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
1 hour ago, CAAdmission said:

It'll come out. In an org as big as AAPA, a lot of people know. There must be a legal gag order to keep it clamed down this tight. Even without details, at the very least it should be noted if this was a resignation or dismissal for cause. 

Given nothing other than how long it took to remove her AAPA service from her public presence, specifically the Yale faculty bio that listed her as past president 2022-23, I am not seeing a voluntary resignation.  Resignation via coercion ("resign or..."), perhaps, but certainly not a voluntary resignation of any sort.  I mean, any adults who've been around for a while know that when someone "leaves for other opportunities" or "refocuses their career to spend more time with their family" they've really been fired or offered an opportunity to resign in lieu of being fired, and the public press release is all about nominally saving face while communicating the change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having served on the board of a hospital district (public) I can promise you there are things the board is permitted to do and keep to themselves. The reasons this is permitted, in a public entity, are very few and narrowly interpreted, but I am assuming they are acting under advice of counsel and are pretty comfortable in their position.

Link to comment
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