Doctor X (with a PHD in Biblical Counseling from a Diploma Mill)

[MMiz]

Is it ethical for an EMS educator to refer to himself as Doctor Lastname when he has an online degree in Biblical Counseling from an unaccredited diploma mill?

 

[Carlos Danger]

Many have made the argument that in the clinical setting, only physicians should be referred to as doctors. This argument is being weakened, though….more and more non-physician clinicians (and non-clinicians) are obtaining doctorates and referring to themselves as such.

Outside of a hospital or clinic however…..physicians don't now and never did own the title "doctor". The term refers to educational preparation, not professional role. It is not a job title.

Edit: whatever agency this guy works for could certainly make a policy outlining how those in certain positions are expected to refer to themselves.

 

[DrParasite]

most people with PhDs can call themselves doctor (it is a doctorate of philosophy), but I know several who have PhDs and don't work in academia who say it's frowned upon to call yourself doctor if you aren't a medical professional.

Should a nurse with a doctorate in nursing be referred to as doctor in a hospital?

as for the original question, if you have a degree from an unaccredited institution, in a field that isn't related to what you are currently in, than calling yourself Dr Lastname shows that you are doing it for your own ego only and most are going to simply roll their eyes at you.

 

[ThadeusJ]

Today's bit of trivia: In the UK, physicians are called "Mister/Miss/MRS/Ms..." unless they have a Doctorate of Medicine, which allows the use of "Dr".

 

[MMiz]

@ThadeusJ yeah, makes sense.

But what if you have a PhD from Therapon University, an "institute of Online Learning for the Body of Christ" in Biblical Counseling?

Starting your EMS-related YouTube video by identifying yourself as "Doctor X" seems disingenuous.

 

[E tank]

I suppose they can call themselves anything they like. But if they are in a certain setting that would give the implication that their terminal degree is in a field of the same setting in which they are using the title, and it is indeed not, that is on them and risks their credibility.

 

[Carlos Danger]

@ThadeusJ yeah, makes sense.

But what if you have a PhD from Therapon University, an "institute of Online Learning for the Body of Christ" in Biblical Counseling?

Starting your EMS-related YouTube video by identifying yourself as "Doctor X" seems disingenuous.

There seems to be two separate questions here:

1. Should a non-physician educator with a doctoral degree refer to themselves as "doctor" in the setting of EMS education? I think it depends on the setting and the culture and the role of the educator. Someone with a PhD in physiology or education or public health might legitimately refer to themselves that way when teaching in EMS. It just depends.

2. Is a doctorate in Biblical Counseling from Therapon University even a legitimate degree? I have no idea. Even if it is legitimate, is it relevant to the role and the setting?

 

[VFlutter]

I see no problem with an educator referring to themselves as doctor if they have the relevant doctoral degree. They have earned that title. However in the medical field I think it should be qualified / disclosed that it is a Phd vs MD/DO. For example introducing yourself for a Youtube video should be "I am Dr. Smith, Phd." or "Dr. Smith, DNP".

I think calling yourself Doctor with a non-academic online degree is completely disingenuous and asinine.

 

[wanderingmedic]

I think calling yourself Doctor with a non-academic online degree is completely disingenuous and asinine.

I agree.

Healthcare as a whole is putting a bigger and bigger emphasis on higher education. With that should come the ability to use an academic title in the clinical setting. "Hi, I'm Dr. Smith, your physical therapist." OR "Hi, I'm Dr. Winslow, your psychiatric nurse practitioner." should be acceptable.

But...introducing yourself as a "Doctor" with a "PhD" from an unaccredited school in a fake field...that is just wrong.

On another note. If you look at Biblical Counseling, you'll find that the "Counseling" part of that name is false advertising. None of their stuff is evidence based. Jay Adams, the founder of "biblical counseling," based his system on confrontation over sin. There is no understanding of psychology or physiology. The whole approach is flawed, and basically operates off the premise that: if you read the bible, and are a "real" Christian, you will stop sinning and get better. They often deny or downplay the existence of mental illness, and downplay or deny the role of medicine in the treatment. It’s a terrible system, and is borderline abusive to the people subjected to it.

 

[EpiEMS]

Is it ethical for an EMS educator to refer to himself as Doctor Lastname when he has an online degree in Biblical Counseling from an unaccredited diploma mill?

Sure, and I can be Reverend EpiEMS if I pay $30 online. In all seriousness, this seems pretty unethical - he (in this case) is implying that he has a (relevant) credential, when it's really (1) not relevant and (2) pretty much baloney to begin with.

Many have made the argument that in the clinical setting, only physicians should be referred to as doctors. This argument is being weakened, though….more and more non-physician clinicians (and non-clinicians) are obtaining doctorates and referring to themselves as such.

If we can prove the public has no clue & that they are going to be harmed, there could be a compelling (to some) argument to push this line of reasoning. Personally, I think disclosure is the ethical thing here. That said, I'd also argue that the clinical doctorates being rolled out in many fields don't actually add any value.

 

[Carlos Danger]

If we can prove the public has no clue & that they are going to be harmed, there could be a compelling (to some) argument to push this line of reasoning. I think disclosure is the ethical thing here.

Accurately identifying yourself and your role is of course important. But worst case scenario, someone misunderstands and thinks that the psychologist or physical therapist or audiologist or NP or PA is a physician. How would harm come of that? The clinician would probably have to be practicing outside of their scope in order fo any harm to come as a result of any misunderstanding.

I get called "doctor" all the time (even though I always clearly identify myself as a NURSE anesthetist, and that title is also clearly displayed on my badge) and I always correct the person the first time, but when they keep saying it it isn't my problem that they refuse to pay attention. No harm has ever come to someone in my care because they misunderstood and assumed I was a physician.

That said, I'd also argue that the clinical doctorates being rolled out in many fields don't actually add any value.

You could just as easily argue that physicians don't need a doctorate, since a large percentage do not, and seem to get along just fine.

I think there is plenty of value in adding research or teaching expertise to a clinical education. It isn't necessary for clinical practice and I probably wouldn't agree that it should be mandatory, but it certainly can have value.

 

[wanderingmedic]

If we can prove the public has no clue & that they are going to be harmed, there could be a compelling (to some) argument to push this line of reasoning.

Just thought of this: There is a precedent for non-physicians being called "Doctor" in the hospital. Clinical Psych (PsyD and PhD) have been called Doctor for a long time. I don't think clinical psych going by "Doctor" this has ever led to adverse outcomes…

 

[EpiEMS]

But worst case scenario, someone misunderstands and thinks that the psychologist or physical therapist or audiologist or NP or PA is a physician. How would harm come of that? The clinician would probably have to be practicing outside of their scope in order fo any harm to come as a result of any misunderstanding.

Certainly true. Hence why I said if it can be proven. However, I would say this - the biggest harm is probably going to be financial, both for the healthcare system at large and for patients (consumers, at the end of the day, bear all costs). Do doctorally-prepared providers have higher salaries? Probably, yeah, because the barrier to entry is higher (ceteris paribus, there are going to be less of them). I don't have any empirics on this one, just going back to first principles.

At the end of the day, consumers could very well be harmed by providing too much time in school to providers who don't need it.

You could just as easily argue that physicians don't need a doctorate, since a large percentage do not, and seem to get along just fine.

I think there is plenty of value in adding research or teaching expertise to a clinical education. It isn't necessary for clinical practice and I probably wouldn't agree that it should be mandatory, but it certainly can have value.

Need? Most don't. After all, in many places in the world, medical education is an undergraduate-entry program (6 years), and an MD is a true (research) doctorate. I'd say medical school ought to be shortened to three years...but that's neither here nor there.

I'm not saying there isn't value in a doctorally prepared practitioner, but I question whether it should be the baseline.

Just thought of this: There is a precedent for non-physicians being called "Doctor" in the hospital. Clinical Psych (PsyD and PhD) have been called Doctor for a long time. I don't think clinical psych going by "Doctor" this has ever led to adverse outcomes…

Totally a good point.

 

[Carlos Danger]

However, I would say this - the biggest harm is probably going to be financial, both for the healthcare system at large and for patients (consumers, at the end of the day, bear all costs). Do doctorally-prepared providers have higher salaries? Probably, yeah, because the barrier to entry is higher (ceteris paribus, there are going to be less of them). I don't have any empirics on this one, just going back to first principles.

At the end of the day, consumers could very well be harmed by providing too much time in school to providers who don't need it.

I think healthcare economics is much more complex and elastic than that. First, I don't think there's any reason to believe that increasing educational requirements a modest amount will have much effect on labor supply - I can tell you that as of right now, there is no difference in compensation between a NP or CRNA with a MSN vs. one with a DNP or PhD in most areas, if any.

More importantly, compensation of PA's and NP's is such a small fraction of overall healthcare costs that even if a hospital system were forced to increase expenditures in that area by a significant percentage, it would not even amount to a drop in the bucket that is that system's overall budget.

You have hospital systems doling out six-figure "quality" bonuses annually to general surgeons on top of their $350k+ salaries, orthopedists making over a half million a year plus expenses doing nothing but knee scopes which are proven not to help, anesthesiologists making huge salaries to "supervise" CRNA's, GI docs making MASSIVE amounts of money billing for anesthesia for colonoscopies even though it isn't required and doesn't help outcomes, reps making as much as some physicians, executives making several times what the highest paid physicians make in their systems, and some hospitals providing "room service" requiring the hiring of concierges offering 4-star meal options in order to ensure that patient satisfaction scores are as high as possible. Also, BILLIONs of dollars a year lost to medicare/medicaid fraud.

Yeah, I don't think we need to worry about midlevels - who provide great value in the first place - breaking the bank if their compensation goes up some.

 

[EpiEMS]

I don't think there's any reason to believe that increasing educational requirements a modest amount will have much effect on labor supply - I can tell you that as of right now, there is no difference in compensation between a NP or CRNA with a MSN vs. one with a DNP or PhD in most areas, if any.

I'm not so convinced. There's plenty of evidence out there for differential compensation for ADNs and BSNs, despite having the same licensure.

Yeah, I don't think we need to worry about midlevels - who provide great value in the first place - breaking the bank if their compensation goes up some.

Midlevels are a good thing (they reduce physician rents, for one) - but more education doesn't necessarily mean better outcomes, and it definitely means more costs.

(I'm way off topic of the thread with all this discussion...Sorry, OP.)

 

[ExpatMedic0]