Just wondering about this. Required licensure would raise the status of the medical assistants in my opinion and also include a specific scope of practice. It would also probably raise our pay level which might actually get more nurses (LPNs primarily) back into office nursing since the docs would have to pay the MAs more. We all know the primary reason docs hire MAs is because they can get away with paying us so little.
I think a better question to pose might be: would physicians support MA licensure?
MA's may work with nurses but they work for phsycians, so who cares if nurses would support it or not? It's moot.
My point is, I doubt physicians would support it and this is why:
1. MA's are used as a cheaper alternative to licensed nursing staff. Licensure might mean MA's can vie for higher pay.
2. Licensure would give MA's a definative scope of practice, and alot of the things that MA's are allowed to do while practicing 'under' the license of the physician (nursing and medical duties- like giving injections) would no doubt not make it into the scope of the MA.
No flames please, just my honest opinion. And I do not dislike MA's- my mother is one, and she enjoys her job very much. But when she complains to me about the poor wages/benefits and 0 chances of advancement I tell her to go back to school.
I think you're right about "tell her to go back to school". I am finishing up my first year of nursing school and I work in LTC. I can't tell you how many of the aides I work with constantly complain of the pay and how the nurses do "nothing". I tell them all the time to go back to school. Funny thing is that their response is, " I don't want all the responsibility that the nurses have." I don't get it. If you want more "respect" or "better pay" quit complaining and do something about it.
I think a better question to pose might be: would physicians support MA licensure?
2. Licensure would give MA's a definative scope of practice, and alot of the things that MA's are allowed to do while practicing 'under' the license of the physician (nursing and medical duties- like giving injections) would no doubt not make it into the scope of the MA.
I don't support the licensure of MA's because I think that hospitals and doctors have a long history of trying to replace LPN's and RN's with lower paid UAP's. If it were up to me, I would have a lower Nurse:Patient ratio and eliminate techs on the floor. But that is another thread altogether.
I understand that aspect. However, if the docs couldn't get MA's for a Walmart wage and had to compensate us better, would they not be inclined to go back to hiring licensed personel? The reason they hire us now is that there is such a drastic difference in what they have to pay a nurse. If they had to pay a MA closer to the amount they have to pay a nurse, they wouldn't be so quick to hire MAs instead of nurses, putting more nurses back into offices.
Please don't think I'm saying I should make nurse's (even LPN) wages, everyone says "if you want nurse's wages, go back to school to be a nurse". I never said I thought we should make nurse's wages.
I think a better question to pose might be: would physicians support MA licensure?
MA's may work with nurses but they work for phsycians, so who cares if nurses would support it or not? It's moot.
My point is, I doubt physicians would support it and this is why:
1. MA's are used as a cheaper alternative to licensed nursing staff. Licensure might mean MA's can vie for higher pay.
2. Licensure would give MA's a definative scope of practice, and alot of the things that MA's are allowed to do while practicing 'under' the license of the physician (nursing and medical duties- like giving injections) would no doubt not make it into the scope of the MA.
No flames please, just my honest opinion. And I do not dislike MA's- my mother is one, and she enjoys her job very much. But when she complains to me about the poor wages/benefits and 0 chances of advancement I tell her to go back to school.
Oh, I highly doubt the physicians would support it. They'd be crazy to. Just figure what the doc where I work saves by having us 5 MAs instead of having to hire receptionists and nurses. Plus, we're all interchangeable (MAs) someone from back office calls off, you just pull someone from front office. It's a win-win situation for the docs.
When I worked as a CNA in a nursing home, I made less money than my baby sister did as a cashier at WalMart. As a new grad RN, I made less money than my husband did at his job that only required a high school degree and a valid driver's license. If you want to be more monetarily valuable, you'll have to get into a new line of work. You'll get paid what the market demands, and that's influenced by a lot of things, none of which are really based on "value."
Just goes to show the differences in pays across the board. I took almost a 3.00 an hour pay cut going from CNA to CMA.
Good point on getting paid what the market demands.
Specializes in ED, Cardiac Medicine, Retail Health.
OBRA went into effect in 1987 so CNA isn't that new. I wasn't aware of the the military aspect as I have no background in that area.
Lorraine
CMA, CNA[/quote
I am a military Hospital Corspman able to do things that a civilian would need a license for. I am able to suture, diagnose and treat (including prescribing meds), draw blood, give injections, start IVs, ect. But the only civilian jobs that I would qualify for without additional education are CMA, CNA, or Patient Care tech. If MA's were licensed I am sure that more pay would be expected, and MDs would replace MA's with a cheaper alternative as they replaced RN's with MA's. I do believe that MA's are not paid their worth, but we live in a bottom line society and sadly the bottom line is money.
I understand that aspect. However, if the docs couldn't get MA's for a Walmart wage and had to compensate us better, would they not be inclined to go back to hiring licensed personel? The reason they hire us now is that there is such a drastic difference in what they have to pay a nurse. If they had to pay a MA closer to the amount they have to pay a nurse, they wouldn't be so quick to hire MAs instead of nurses, putting more nurses back into offices.
Please don't think I'm saying I should make nurse's (even LPN) wages, everyone says "if you want nurse's wages, go back to school to be a nurse". I never said I thought we should make nurse's wages.
Lorraine
CMA, CNA
No, they wouldn't, because they could still replace RN/LPN with a lower paid person.
You forget that the other reason docs hire MAs is an MA is pretty much allowed to do whatever under a doctor's license, whereas nurses have licenses and a clearly defined scope of practice depending on the level of licensure.
You didn't say you wanted to make a nurse's wage, but you did say you wanted to be paid closer to a nurse's wage. Pretty much the same thing.
As others have said, if you want the $$ and the scope of practice that nurses have, go to nursing school. Please don't try to get us to jump on board another attempt for UAPs to get into nursing through the back door.
I thought that you had to have a license to practice as an MA. I am nationally licensed and worked very hard to get and maintain it.
You don't have a license that stands on its own. It's also not a license that is supervised by your state's BON, no doubt. If you make a mistake, you alone cannot be held accountable.
I'm not saying you didn't work hard, but there is a difference.
I thought that you had to have a license to practice as an MA. I am nationally licensed and worked very hard to get and maintain it.
You're nationally licensed as an MA? There's no such license that I've heard of in the united states. Are you thinking of a certification or registration? Big diff.
Lorraine, 1st I'd like to clarify--where i live it is illegal for MAs of any capacity to give injections of any kind. State law--not policy. Does it happen? Yeah--but it's illegal. So for someone to say "I think I should have a license because of my duties such as giving injections" makes no sense to me.
I'd personally be pissed if it required licensure. Like I said, and PPs said--MA is an entry level position. It is what many MAs are looking for--an entry way into the medical field, something they can do after going to a vo/tech for a few months or being trained on the job. That's what I wanted and needed. Sure--the pay wasn't amazing, but I got experience that I still draw upon today as an RN.
By requiring licensure, you'd be taking away a job opportunity from a lot of people. I presonally wouldn't have been able to do it. And most of the students I went to school with (and later, taught) were in the same boat as I was. Whether or not they were looking to advance in the future, what they were seeking from a MA job was what you said--an opportunity to perform technical tasks under the supervision of a doctor.
If you want a license, more money, be legally covered to give injections, then really--why not get your LPN? You could stay in a doctors office if you'd like. I understand that you don't want to--but why? You can't eat your cake and have it too. ::shrug::
2007RNHopeful
14 Posts
I think you're right about "tell her to go back to school". I am finishing up my first year of nursing school and I work in LTC. I can't tell you how many of the aides I work with constantly complain of the pay and how the nurses do "nothing". I tell them all the time to go back to school. Funny thing is that their response is, " I don't want all the responsibility that the nurses have." I don't get it. If you want more "respect" or "better pay" quit complaining and do something about it.