Hospital doctors being replaced with "associates" with just 2 years training

[pellinore]

A large NHS body – the Bradford District and Craven health and care partnership, responsible for the health and care needs of 2.4 million people – appeared to be breaking the law by producing posters that misrepresented physician associates as doctors to its patient population. “The physician will see you now” stated the posters. But the member of staff featured and explicitly described as a “physician in Bradford” was no such thing. In place of a five-year medical degree, they had a truncated, two-year physician associate degree.

“Physician”, like “doctor”, is a legally protected term. The legislation exists to protect you, the public, from the dangers of fake doctors masquerading as the real thing. In producing these posters, the NHS may have been in breach of section 49 of the Medical Act 1983, which makes misuse of the title “physician” a criminal offence. Equally horrifying to many doctors was the organisation’s poster with the strapline: “The cancer specialist will see you now.”

What if your ‘physician’ wasn’t actually a doctor at all? Beware this new reckless experiment | Rachel Clarke | The Guardian

Edited July 8 by Still Waters
Trimmed for length. The rest can be viewed in the source link

[+Desertrat56]

Yep, welcome to our world.  That has been going on in the U.S. for over a decade.  They call them physician's assistants and nurse practitioners.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

1 hour ago, pellinore said:

A large NHS body – the Bradford District and Craven health and care partnership, responsible for the health and care needs of 2.4 million people – appeared to be breaking the law by producing posters that misrepresented physician associates as doctors to its patient population. “The physician will see you now” stated the posters. But the member of staff featured and explicitly described as a “physician in Bradford” was no such thing. In place of a five-year medical degree, they had a truncated, two-year physician associate degree.

“Physician”, like “doctor”, is a legally protected term. The legislation exists to protect you, the public, from the dangers of fake doctors masquerading as the real thing. In producing these posters, the NHS may have been in breach of section 49 of the Medical Act 1983, which makes misuse of the title “physician” a criminal offence. Equally horrifying to many doctors was the organisation’s poster with the strapline: “The cancer specialist will see you now.”

What if your ‘physician’ wasn’t actually a doctor at all? Beware this new reckless experiment | Rachel Clarke | The Guardian

Cool.

The medical profession specialise so much now that they don't need 5 years. 2 years in one specialist area should be enough.

[pellinore]

33 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Yep, welcome to our world.  That has been going on in the U.S. for over a decade.  They call them physician's assistants and nurse practitioners.

17 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Cool.

The medical profession specialise so much now that they don't need 5 years. 2 years in one specialist area should be enough.

I think the problem is the deception. I have no problem being seen by a Nurse Practitioner or a Physician's Assistant for things like getting an antibiotic or minor surgery like lancing infected wounds, etc.

I would object to being assessed for e.g. possible sepsis by someone who had just 2 years training when I thought I was being seen by a doctor. I also would be unhappy being referred to a "Cancer Specialist" with the same two years training.

The doctors’ union, the British Medical Association, last week announced it was seeking a judicial review of the GMC over the “dangerous blurring of lines” between doctors and medical associate professions. It argues physician and anaesthesia associates need regulating, but not by the GMC.

Wider use of physician associates will increase inequality, say UK doctors | Doctors | The Guardian

Edited July 8 by pellinore

[Eldorado]

16 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Cool.

The medical profession specialise so much now that they don't need 5 years. 2 years in one specialist area should be enough.

From the OP article...

"None of these groups have a medical degree, nor postgraduate medical training. But their deployment in our health service is billed as “essential” workforce planning – the only way to address rising patient demand and a desperate shortage of trained medics."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/20/physician-doctor-reckless-experiment-nhs-associates

[pellinore]

8 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

From the OP article...

"None of these groups have a medical degree, nor postgraduate medical training. But their deployment in our health service is billed as “essential” workforce planning – the only way to address rising patient demand and a desperate shortage of trained medics."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/20/physician-doctor-reckless-experiment-nhs-associates

I can think of another way of addressing shortages of doctors, nurses and teachers- train them. The problem was the Tories were not prepared to invest in education, preferring to take staff from African and Asian countries already trained- and causing shortages in those countries. NHS Recruiting Doctors from WHO "Red List" Countries (exepose.com)

Edited July 8 by pellinore

[+and-then]

In the US we are trending this way, also.  It is more common now to be seen by a Physician's assistant/Nurse Practitioner than an MD, in many clinics and emergency rooms.  I've seen the medical establishment from the inside.  I trained in hospitals as well as a university for didactic education to be an imaging tech.  I've done X-Ray, CT, and MRI and I saw the rigors of medical school while my wife went through a four year program, then a five year residency.  

Americans are aging and the wave of Boomers - now joined by a massive influx of "migrants", are taxing our resources in many ways.  The fact is that in our system, IF there are sufficient numbers of trained, professional MDs who are overseeing the work of PAs and NPs, say a ratio of 1:3 or 1:4, those associate practitioners can be very effective in carrying out most types of healthcare challenges.  If they are being used within one specialty only and have an MD who is overseeing their decisions, they can be very effective.  The crucial point is whether they are being monitored carefully.  Remember that this is all about $ and the associates earn about half to as little as 1/3 of what MDs earn.  I don't have a knee-jerk disapproval of all practitioners but depending on the specialty, I might insist on waiting until I could see the MD.

[Scholar4Truth]

For minor medical issues I don't have a problem being treated by such people, but when it comes major issues and surgeries nope.