Boston Sunday Globe

How to end the fights over who gets to be called ‘Doctor’

- By Stephanie W. Edmonds, Alden A. Bush and Ginny L. Ryan

Florida lawmakers recently passed legislatio­n to prevent advanced practice nurses in Florida with doctorates from using the honorific “Doctor.” The state House and Senate bills proposed that nurses with doctorates who introduce themselves to patients as “Dr. Smith, nurse practition­er,” could face disciplina­ry action. Lobbyists who supported this measure referred to it as a “patient empowermen­t bill that allows them to understand who is treating them.” Thankfully, Governor Ron DeSantis vetoed the bill.

But this was just one of many recent declaratio­ns that referring to doctorally prepared nurses as “Doctor” is confusing to patients. In a 2022 article in Missouri Medicine, Gary Gaddis, who has an MD and a PhD, wrote that when advanced practice nurses ask to be called “Doctor,” it “misleads the patient and perpetrate­s a fraud which defies their patient’s trust.”

Among the three of us, we have one doctor of medicine (MD), one doctor of philosophy (PhD) who is an RN, and one doctor of nursing practice

(DNP) who is a psychiatri­c nurse practition­er. We believe that these legislator­s and physicians need a little history lesson — and a reality check.

“Doctor” is derived from the Latin verb “docere,” which means “to teach.” The term was first used sometime in the 1300s to refer to a scholar; hence persons with a PhD were called “doctors.” The honorific has been used for centuries by profession­s other than physicians; it was not until the 1600s that medical schools started referring to graduates as “doctors” as a sign of respect and prestige. In the United States, the MD degree became the earliest iteration of the profession­al doctorate, which is tied to a specific vocation (medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, physical therapy, nursing practice, etc.), unlike the research-based and more academical­ly rigorous PhD.

Attempts by some physicians in modern times to restrict the honorific and physicians who call themselves a “real doctor” diminish the scholarshi­p and experience of all others who hold profession­al or research doctorate degrees. Those with any doctoral degree, whether an MD, DO, DNP, PhD, DPT, OD, AuD, DDS, DPM, or PharmD, have dedicated years to their education and should be able to use the honorific “Doctor” in academic and profession­al settings. Referring to only physicians as “doctors” when other clinicians hold doctorates sends a divisive and hierarchic­al message that erodes interdisci­plinary respect and collaborat­ion. It also enables power dynamics contrary to modern health care’s push to dismantle paternalis­m.

In health care, patient rights and safety should always be the priority. Clinicians are increasing­ly encouraged to introduce themselves and their role, and many organizati­ons give clinicians name badges that clearly state their role to avoid confusion. Importantl­y, role confusion among patients is often based on more than assigned honorifics. Patients may make assumption­s regarding whether a clinician is a doctor or nurse based on implicit associatio­ns or biases. For example, women and people of color are often assumed to be nurses, whereas men are often called “doctors” when they may not be physicians or hold doctoral degrees. Historical­ly, women and people of color have been largely excluded from graduate programs, especially those granted the most prestige by their dominant white male membership. Now that more women and people of color are achieving doctoral degrees, limiting the use of their hard-earned honorifics is misguided and inappropri­ate.

Inside profession­al medical settings, where institutio­nalized racism and misogyny occur daily, the honorific “Doctor” is significan­t and should be used.

However, medical profession­als should stop relying on honorifics to communicat­e our roles to patients.

In our ideal health care landscape, health profession­als with doctoral degrees would use the “Doctor” honorific in academic and profession­al forums among colleagues and peers only, and no one would use an honorific with patients. In clinical settings, titles and honorifics can transfer the locus of power from the patient and family to the medical profession­al and can create an unproducti­ve hierarchy within the care team. Honorifics are used to show respect and esteem, particular­ly to a person of superior social rank. Patient-centered communicat­ion, shared decision-making, and team-based care are challengin­g if one team member is considered to have a superior social rank.

We are not the first to propose doing away with the honorific in patient care. In 2021, Kenneth R. Pike and M. Scott Moore argued in the Journal of Health Ethics that in patient interactio­ns, extending the honorific “Doctor” to those with a doctor of nursing practice degree is “moving in the wrong direction.” We agree: Neither DNPs nor physicians should use this honorific with patients. We should reserve it for lecture halls, conference­s, and social gatherings if desired.

In this time of clinician burnout, staffing shortages, and increasing­ly complex medical challenges, we need to work together to optimize the health of our communitie­s. Arguing about who can use the honorific “Doctor” around patients is unnecessar­ily divisive.

Stephanie W. Edmonds is principal research nurse scientist at Abbott Northweste­rn Hospital, part of Allina Health, in Minneapoli­s. Alden A. Bush is a psychiatri­c nurse practition­er in an outpatient psychiatry program in Clinton County, N.Y. Ginny L. Ryan is a professor of obstetrics and gynecology and the division chief of reproducti­ve endocrinol­ogy and infertilit­y at the University of Washington School of Medicine. A version of this essay first appeared in STAT News, a publicatio­n owned by Boston Globe Media Partners that reports on health, medicine, and scientific discovery.

 ?? ADOBE ??
ADOBE

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States