Another Village, Another Idiot: “You realize you don’t have to be a Dr to be an anesthesiologist, cardiologist, pulmonologist etc.”
Ok, USMLE Step 3 behind me, residency interview season well underway, and here I sit on a Sunday evening; 8 mile run complete, and a pint of mint chocolate chip halfway consumed. However, this twitter comment (image above) has me distracted and rather annoyed. Is this really a doctorally prepared individual? I previously wrote about the village idiot in a blog about Florida legislating scope of practice versus increased scope of practice via education (https://authenticmedicine.com/2020/03/village-idiots-florida-legislature-passes-bill-that-will-increase-access-to-healthcare-providers/). If this statement is indicative of the mindset of the doctorally prepared DNP (Doctor of Nursing practice), the village idiot has left Florida and pervaded the DNP curriculum. I was never a DNP, but was an MSN (Master of Science in nursing) prepared nurse practitioner (NP), so believe me when I say, this persons attempt to delineate the educational track for a DNP is false, sensationalized, and really gibberish. And really for your information (FYI), a DNP adds nothing clinically to an MSN prepared NP. Thus, a DNP is especially NOT prepared to practice at the clinical level for internal medicine. But what does that really mean anyway?? More gibberish. What clinical level for internal medicine? There is the clinical level of the NP, there is the clinical level of the PA, there is the clinical level of an MSIII on internal medicine clerkship, there is the clinical level of internal medicine physician intern and then resident and finally the clinical level of a residency trained, board-certified, internal medicine physician. Like it or not, they are not all on the same clinical level, or level education and training, and therefore scope of practice. I’ll leave that there, as I’m sure the hate, vitriol, and lies will ensue in the commentary.
But what I really take umbrage to is the unintelligible comment:
“You realize you don’t have to be a Dr to be an anesthesiologist, cardiologist, pulmonologist etc.”
Perhaps this is the mantra being preached by the village idiot into the DNP curriculums. I don’t even know what to make of it. Is this person confused? Perhaps, but definitely delusional. Do they mean to imply that non physicians can be anesthesiologists, cardiologists, pulmonologists etc.? That’s delusional. The very nature of the term anesthesiologist, cardiologist, pulmonologist convey “physician that practices the branch of medicine” known as anesthesiology, cardiology, or pulmonary etc. Emphasis on “branch of medicine!” Not branch of nursing. I used to be a psychiatric NP, does this person think I could have been a non-physician psychiatrist, or even better, a nurse psychiatrist? (I mean, the CRNA’s are now referring to themselves as nurse anesthesiologists). To the same, a psychiatrist is a physician that practices the branch of medicine known as psychiatry. Are we now going to have an onslaught of nurse-cardiologists, nurse-pulmonologists, nurse-psychiatrists, and nurse-anesthesiologists? What’s most alarming in that question, is the implication on scope of practice that the belief of some, as indicated in the individual’s statement, that there is equivalence. Remember, this person believes themselves to be at the same “clinical level of internal medicine.”
This needs to stop, and the village idiot needs to move out of healthcare and find a new home.
This is some scary stuff.
Washington State law.
RCW 18.83.020
License required—Use of “psychology” or similar terms.
(1) To safeguard the people of the state of Washington from the dangers of unqualified and improper practice of psychology, it is unlawful for any person to whom this chapter applies to represent himself or herself to be a psychologist without first obtaining a license as provided in this chapter.
(2) A person represents himself or herself to be a psychologist when the person adopts or uses any title or any description of services which incorporates one or more of the following terms: “psychology,” “psychological,” “psychologist,” or any term of like import.
[ 1986 c 27 § 1; 1965 c 70 § 2; 1955 c 305 § 2.]
I knew a mental health nurse practitioner who held herself out to the public with signage and business cards, etc., that read “psychiatry”, “psychiarric services”, etc., and patients came to me saying they had seen a “psychiatrist”.
Complaint to the nursing board, of course they didn’t give a damn. “Patient must have been confused”. Of course he was confused, I saw the signage and business cards with “PSYCHIATRY” in large bold type, and “PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES” etc., and “ARNP” in micro-print.
The Nursing Board blamed the patient.
The Medical Board said it was not in their purview, since the individual was a nurse. Seemed to me with that attitude, my brother the accountant could call himself a neurosurgeon and the Board would have no interest.
I can imagine the fight if Medical organizations tried to protect their professional names.
This is such egregious career creep. It is sickening. I was watching a video this week on Tik Tok. Don’t laugh, there is good stuff on there once you “train” it to lose all the scantily clad middle age women dancing. Anyway, it was an “anesthesiologist” explaining the various nuances of anesthesia. I thought the entire time that he was an MD. At the very end, he tells us that he is a “nurse anesthesiologist”. That really ticked me off. REALLY!!! I consider myself reasonably intelligent and perceptive, but he had me fooled. So, he had everybody watching fooled, I assume.
Such a bold mission they have to dupe the public. It is immoral.
Nothing like attempting to mislead the unsuspecting patient!!
We poor slobs see “oligist” and assume we’re seeing an MD/DO, not a nurse!!
Well, Dr. Scott Atlas showed you can be a neuroradiologist and be an infectious disease expert also! Ha! How about chiropractic neurologist? I read an article last night about Sidney Crosby being treated (and he claimed successfully) by one in Florida who created his own board exam. That said, getting back to DNPs, the best DNP (and I’ve worked with several and with many NPs) is a better practitioner than the dumbest doctor…and I’ve worked with a crapload of them.
Note they’re actually counting high school in their graduate studies by saying two years prerequisite prior to registered nurse training. Also note they put down the maximal amount of years.
The minimal amount could be as little as 5 years after high school. Given the hours in school, and background that is about the same as somebody with a hard undergraduate degree in terms of education hours. In other words they’re turning in undergraduate level of education into the equivalent of a doctorate and still without a clinical residency.
The bottom line perhaps 2 years of science education and his little as a few hundred hours of clinical experience. I had 8 years of post high school education in sciences, a high level of testing of knowledge and intelligence, and 35, 000 of clinical training experience.My level of science education in high school probably exceeded what most of these nursing doctorates now have. in the old days only the best and the brightest nurses could complete a nurse practitioner pathway. Now the best and brightest go to medical school. And the nursing students are not screened but simply have to have tuition for an online school.
Well, at least he/she is saving LOVES.