Why doesn’t the AMA just call themselves a union already?

June 29, 2006 @ Nikhil Rao5 Comments

Nurse-practitioners apparently shouldn’t be allowed to practice autonomously. The American Medical Association thinks they need to be supervised (read: employed) by a doctor at all times.

This amuses me given that there is a vast and growing shortage of doctors. If you want proof, just count the number of foreign medical graduates in residency positions right at this moment. It’s even more ironic given that clear-thinking individuals have been saying that nurse-practitioners and physician’s assistants are perfectly poised to fill a good chunk of this void.

Nurse-practitioners and PAs alike have a good deal of training. I’ve shadowed and worked with both and have walked away with nothing but the utmost respect for their abilities. No, they’re not doctors, but you don’t need a doctor to do many things they’re currently tasked with in healthcare delivery.

The healthcare market is huge. And even if these NPs and PAs do reduce the demand for family practice doctors somewhat, there is still plenty of opportunity for American medical graduates. Not to mention the fact that since it costs considerably less to produce an NP or PA than it does a doctor, we could be looking at massive savings in labor costs that could be passed on to the consumer.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

5 Comments → “Why doesn’t the AMA just call themselves a union already?”


  1. Rehan

    Jun 29, 2006

    I think the AMA is kind of extreme, but PA’s are good at procedural stuff, like they’ve been trained and taught how to do x number of things and they do them really well and professionally, but they lack a lot of the theory or base behind the reason stuff is done a certain way and when there’s a deviation in patient condition from the norm, they need a doctor there who can call the shots correctly.

    A PA goes to school for half the time a doctor does and has a very limited scope of knowledge compared to a physician and although for regular run of the mill procedural stuff that doesn’t really matter when it comes down to atypical cases unless you have a sound basis of physiology, pathology and pharmacology you’re really not going to be equipped with the tools to make a decision that’s in the patients best interest.

    I, for one, would choose to see a doctor over a PA anyday and I’m betting the average person would also.

    BTW, PAs aren’t alone in their desire to usurp the rights of the physician without putting in the due training — I think I recently heard about dentists (not physicians) fighting plastic surgeons (physicians) in court for the ability to do chin and nosejobs.

    Either way, interesting post and a good read :)

    Reply

  2. Viper007Bond

    Jun 29, 2006

    A denist use to live on my street and his license plate was something like “NO AMA”. I really don’t blame him. lol

    Reply

  3. c-mo

    Jun 29, 2006

    I kinda like the idea of a physician having oversight of PAs and CRNPs.

    It’s good for patient safety, particularly when scope of practice is in question.

    Reply

  4. Tito

    Jun 30, 2006

    Wow… people against cost reductions in health care…

    A question I did have however, is that many doctor visits for routine things result in a perscription. Would PA’s be able to write these? (I think perscriptions are wrong to begin with, but that’s a different story.)

    Reply

  5. Bruce

    Jun 30, 2006

    THE AMA ISNT A UNION BECAUSE GEORGE W. BUSH WAS TOLD BY “DICK” CHENEY H THAT HE WAS’NT GONNA MAKE ANY MONEY FROM IT AND IF HE DID HE WAS GONNA USE IT FOR THE WAR EFFORT

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 2010 Homeland Stupidity.