[n_g]

Let's learn the lesson of the CRNA experience with pain in Louisiana. If you push hard enough, the MD's will push back. After a few legal challenges, CRNA's are legally banned from doing pain in that state. If DNP proclamations anger enough or the wrong MD's, all advanced practice nursing may fall under the board of medicine in the future. Let's not kid anyone. Everyone knows that NP's and DNP's practice medicine and nursing would have a difficult time convincing a court otherwise.

[n_g]

Let's learn the lesson of the CNRA's doing pain in Lousiana. If you push hard enough, the MD's will push back. If you anger enough or the wrong MD's with the DNP claims, all of advanced practice nursing may fall under the boards of medicine in the future. If you didn't already know, CRNA's in Lousiana are by court order banned from doing pain. Let's not kid anyone. Everyone knows that NP's and DNP's practice medicine and it is doubtful that nursing would be able to convince a court otherwise.

[jzzy88]

NPs do not have to bow and scrape to MDs, nor does any other health care professional. If MDs were the only ones to diagnose and treat disease, the health care system would collapse.

[elkpark]

Originally Posted by jzzy88

NPs do not have to bow and scrape to MDs, nor does any other health care professional. If MDs were the only ones to diagnose and treat disease, the health care system would collapse.

It's very easy, and very satisfying, to say that, but the reality is that the physician community has a lot of clout in this country and exercises a lot of control over what other healthcare practitioners are and aren't allowed to do.

I notice your profile says that you are a student, so perhaps you're not aware of this reality in healthcare. However, there are plenty of us here who have actually participated in efforts in our states to get increased practice privileges for advanced practice nurses, and it's basically a competition between the nursing community and the medical community to see which one can more effectively and successfully lobby the state legislature -- and the typical state legislator is much more impressed by physicians than by nurses.

[alkaleidi]

Kind of a silly question...

I know NPs who have their doctorate -- does this mean that when patients go to the office for their annual check-up they will be seeing either Dr. Brown (MD) or Dr. Smith (DNP)?

I wonder if this will cause any confusion. :-P I love NPs (and have literally NEVER been seen by my PCP -- only the 2 NPs in his office) and being one is my long-term goal, but I just had this thought... which could have good and bad points. Patients could confuse the two (not terrible but a slight difference none the less), and then again, it would eliminate having to correct them from calling you "Dr. Smith" instead of "Chris," ending the 10 minute discussion about what an NP is and why you are able to see them in place of the MD.

Just a thought.

[nursienurse_81]

does anyone know the payscale for a dnp compared to a arnp

[jzzy88]

Originally Posted by elkpark

It's very easy, and very satisfying, to say that, but the reality is that the physician community has a lot of clout in this country and exercises a lot of control over what other healthcare practitioners are and aren't allowed to do.

I notice your profile says that you are a student, so perhaps you're not aware of this reality in healthcare. However, there are plenty of us here who have actually participated in efforts in our states to get increased practice privileges for advanced practice nurses, and it's basically a competition between the nursing community and the medical community to see which one can more effectively and successfully lobby the state legislature -- and the typical state legislator is much more impressed by physicians than by nurses.

I'm aware of the clout the medical profession has. I've recently had a negative experience with a physician in my recent clinical rotation. I mentioned an abnormal value of my patient, and the physician grilled me about pathophysiology for about 20 minutes. And it was kind of like gestapo interrogation. In the end the physician said he was trying to use 'socratic' questioning to facilitate my learning, but all the interrogation did was make me uncomfortable and it sent a message to me that physicians don't want to be bothered. I thought that he would be glad that I noticed the abnormal value and since I was a student would be willing to explain his rational as to why we should ignore it, but instead he took a very antagonistic tone. It made me re evaluate my decision to go into nursing, because I have the science background to go into medicine if I want to. I also felt a little disappointed with the medical profession as a whole, because as I found out, that kind of antagonistic attitude is not uncommon. But I strongly feel that other we need to stand up to the medical profession for it's own evolution, and as one revolutionary said "I'd rather die on my feet than spend a life on my knees."

[jzzy88]

It's good to note and should be fairly obvious that a PhD can be referred to as doctor so and so and anyone with a four year doctoral degree can also be referred to as doctor. Like a pharm D would be doctor, etc. Physicians don't have the sole use of the term doctor. So in the sense that the DNP can actually clarify that to people that when you say "doctor X" you are referring to the 4 years of training. If I'm wrong on the meaning of doctor w/r/t M.D, versus PhD doctor, etc, please clarify. I'm not advocating for the DNP, but would be a strong advocate if it included a more in depth science curriculum and expanded scope of practice, but I digress...

[jzzy88]

It's good to note and should be fairly obvious that a PhD can be referred to as doctor so and so and anyone with a four year doctoral degree can also be referred to as doctor. Like a pharm D would be doctor, etc. Physicians don't have the sole use of the term doctor. So in the sense that the DNP can actually clarify that to people that when you say "doctor X" you are referring to the 4 years of training. If I'm wrong on the meaning of doctor w/r/t M.D, versus PhD doctor, etc, please clarify. I'm not advocating for the DNP, but would be a strong advocate if it included a more in depth science curriculum and expanded scope of practice, but I digress...

[jjjoy]

PhD and other doctoral program aren't necessarily four years in length. I'm not sure of the history of the term nor of how institutions determine what courses of study result in a doctoral degree versus other degrees. In many fields, the PhD denotes a very specialized and focused course of study culminating with a long, detailed thesis on a very specific topic. It usually follows or includes a master's level course of study. But when it comes to other types of doctoral degrees, I know even less, except that there's usually no in-between masters level and traditionally don't require the type of in depth thesis needed to earn a PhD. Anyone else know this off-hand?