<p>I had no idea PhDs suffered from such “title envy.” What I really want to know is more about the AMA proposal - a link is fine.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/471/303.doc[/url]”>http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/471/303.doc</a>
It is simply…well, the word obnoxious seems to come to mind. I believe the original intent was to restrict Ph.D. nurses from using the term, but the implication for all healthcare providers that are Ph.D.s is huge. It isn’t an “envy” thing at all. Sheesh.</p>
<p>
? I don’t think any such thing really exists. I mean, look who’s proposing the legislation ;-)</p>
<p>In regards to the situation citied with the invitations, it would have been like addressing someone as Miss if they were Mrs. It’s not the end of the world, but the person in question would probably want to be addressed by their correct title.</p>
<p>The OP’s issue had not arisen before, for me. At first, I wondered why; but then it occurred to me that my colleagues and I have no social lives 
– so, no wonder.</p>
<p>Seriously, I actually do prefer being called “Prof. Mech” (or “Dr. Mech,” as a second preference) formally, and “Quant” informally. This may indicate the tier of university where I am located. Paul Halmos, in “I Want to be a Mathematician,” included a riff on the topic of titles: He remarked that the faculty with Ph.D.'s are called “Dr.” in universities where not all of the faculty have the degree. In public research universities, the faculty are called “Prof.,” because all non-grad-student researchers are presumed to have a doctorate, and there are large numbers of post-docs around. At the University of Chicago, in a triumph of inverse snobbery, the faculty all refer to each other as “Mr.” or “Ms.” (and the phones were answered that way, the last time I called one of them). I do go by “Mrs. Mech” in one particular social setting–to QuantMechPrime’s teachers, out of respect to them.</p>
<p>I think that the name-tag issue in hospitals is connected with access to pharmaceuticals, equipment, and records–as a quick way to indicate who is “authorized,” in settings where the people don’t know each other. If restricted to that setting, I have no problem with it. On my last trip to Europe, my secretary had made the reservations for me, so I was traveling as “Dr. Quant Mech.” (I don’t use the title when I make ticket reservations.) A medical emergency came up, and the flight attendants made a general announcement requesting medical assistance. I didn’t tell them, “I’m not that kind of a doctor,” but it did feel a little weird, since they couldn’t tell whether I was just declining to assist.</p>
<p>Incidentally, Medicine was a B.A. program in Britain for a very long time–it may still be. There is no requirement to make an original contribution to knowledge, to obtain an M.D.</p>
<p>
That’s certainly how I understood it. As I mentioned earlier, any decent hospital I’ve ever been in uses degrees listed after ones name whenever the staff member in question is listed in print (on name tags, IDs, on white coats). </p>
<p>Not only does that make it obvious who you’re dealing with, but it’s the correct way to do it. I’ve occasionally seen a white coat that says “Dr.” so and so MD. That’s incorrect on several levels. </p>
<p>First, it’s redundant since you either use an honorific or title, but not both. Second, one should never address themselves with an honorific… the honorific is something you use out of respect when addressing someone else, not when referring to yourself. </p>
<p>For example, you wouldn’t sign a letter “Dr John Doe” but you might sign it as “John Doe, MD.” This is another reason why someone introducing themselves as “Dr.” is technically incorrect and a bit of a faux pas. They would introduce themselves as Firstname Lastname and the person would respond by saying “nice to meet you Dr/Mr/Ms Lastname.” If it’s informal, then just first names all around. </p>
<p>As I also understand this title snobbery in the medical profession occasionally extends to MDs dissing ODs as having ‘less’ of a medical degree or both of those dissing PhD psychologists. Can’t they just all get along or better yet focus such concerns on fixing our healthcare system! ;-)</p>
<p>I mean the initials after the name is MD or OD… not D. There are many kinds of Dr.'s, MDs are just one kind.</p>
<p>
What’s wrong with calling them Dr.?.. they are a Dr… As for the nametag, it shouldn’t say Dr. Firstname Lastname since that’s an incorrect usage. It should say Firstname Lastname, Degree so there should be no confusion as to who you’re dealing with.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My experience with hospital personnel nametags is that they generally have the format of “Jane Doe, MD” (or DO, DDS, PharmD, DPT, LPN, RN, etc.). Thus the patient, assuming they’re literate, can easily be able to distinguish between their physicians and their nurses, pharmacists, and other medical staff.</p>
<p>In residency/hospital pharmacy, if on rounds with a medical team, I see no problem with someone who earned their PharmD saying “I’m your pharmacist, please call me Dr. Jane Doe”. Like I said, they earned the title, just as dentists, physicians, vets, optometrists, psychologists, and other types of healthcare workers did.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How is it “title envy” if they truly earned the title of doctor?</p>
<p>aphoticmelody-
Well said. If a nametag says MD, DO, Ph.D., Ed.D., RN, etc and the reader doent know the acronym, they could simply ask the person wearing it, I suppose.</p>
<p>I laughed recently when I received an email addressed to Dr. XXXX Ph.D., for as Rocketman mentioned, that is redundant. The person who sent the email to me was supposed to be a Ph.D, but really should know better, so I have to wonder… I am guessing it was an automated response to a query I sent.</p>
<p>As for that silly AMA proposal, it simply raises ones hackles. A podiatry resident should be allowed to use the title “resident” but a psychology resident shouldn’t? Say whaaa???</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And surgeons, who are considered the top of the medical profession in Britain, are called Mr, not Dr.<br>
The high status accorded to physicians is of relatively recent date; they used to be considered only a notch above “sawbones.”</p>
<p>
Academically speaking the MD degree is strictly speaking not a ‘doctorate’ and hence why it’s classified along with some other degrees (such as the JD and MBA) as a ‘first professional degree’.</p>
<p>The primary distinction is that to receive a first professional degree one must demonstrate proficiency in a set of practical training and skills (e.g. being a physician or lawyer), but to receive a PhD one must demonstrate skills AND make an original contribution to knowledge (generally through an extensive research project involving new discoveries). </p>
<p>Outside of North America, a physician or lawyer would generally only have a bachelors or masters degree (even though they’d have the same level of professional training as those in the US). Yet even more reason why the AMA’s proposal is nonsense.</p>
<p>Someone called Dr. might have an M.D. or a Ph.D. or some other degree. I have a Ph.D. and occasionally use the title Dr. professionally, although not socially. But I am not a physician. In a medical setting, it makes sense for the title Dr. to be used by medical doctors as opposed to Ph.D.s since the title is designating a function that could have significant patient implications if used by others. Also, in this setting it really is a title/function rather than an honorific used to address an invitation. H & I both have Ph.D.s, and I would be offended if someone who knew addressed a formal letter as Dr. & Mrs. </p>
<p>In a university setting, titles are often paid attention to more carefully, as in the amount of time students are supposed to wait for a faculty member who is or is not a Ph.D. That’s where the honorific Professor comes in handy when you don’t know for sure.</p>
<p>
I really fail to understand that logic… it sort of assumes that someone with a MD is universally qualified to deal with all medical issues and that someone without a MD is never qualified to deal with medical issues… neither of which is true. </p>
<p>A PhD pharmacist is qualified to deal with pharmacy related medical matters… why shouldn’t they be called Dr.? </p>
<p>A PhD psychologist is qualified to deal with certain medical issues, why shouldn’t they be called Dr.?</p>
<p>Also, every physician has their own specialty. A plastic surgeon wouldn’t be qualified to perform open heart surgery and a heart surgeon wouldn’t be qualified to to do plastic surgery. If someone had heart surgery and the plastic surgeon came in to discuss some cosmetic procedure (and the patient asked them about a heart problem) I’d expect them to simply point out that this wasn’t their specialty and refer them to the heart surgeon. </p>
<p>If someone has a degree that entitles them to be addressed as Dr. then they’re Dr… Obviously they shouldn’t be doing things out of their specialty or area of training, but that has nothing to do with what honorific is being used. </p>
<p>
Quite often professors in the arts faculties will not have PhDs (they might have an MFA) and at some universities not all courses are taught by PhDs. </p>
<p>Although the convention of calling all university faculty “Prof.” is also somewhat of an American thing. In the UK for example, “Prof.” is reserved only for the top ranking academic faculty. There’s no such thing as an Assistant or Associate Professor… just Professor. Therefore lower ranking faculty are addressed as Dr. (assuming they have a doctorate).</p>
<p>^^^ totally agree, rocketman. When I was in college, virtually every faculty member had a Ph.D., yet we never were asked/expected to use the Dr. or Prof. title. That was just the culture of the school. In my work env’t, whether I saw patients in my office or in a hospital, the Dr. title is appropriate as a doctral level healthcare provider providing clinical services to patients. </p>
<p>Tango, just as you would be offended if someone used the Dr. title with your H and not you, so would doctoral level healthcare providers be rightfully offended if they were called Mr/Ms and the MD or DO were called Dr. Also, if a PA were inadvertently called Dr, I’d expect them to correct the patient</p>
<p>I don’t know if it’s still the case, but once I noticed that the pull-down menus for the American Airlines online booking system had just about every honorific and title ever invented (including things like King, Viceroy, Admiral…). </p>
<p>I was tempted to book as ‘HRH’ just to see what happened… ;-)</p>
<p>A PhD. deserves the title of doctor. My husband is surprisingly often referred to by students as Dr. ___, although others call him by his first name. They don’t even think twice about it. Maybe it’s because he teaches at a med school? I don’t care what kids call me, though it’s usually Mrs. His Last Name, which is wrong.</p>
<ol>
<li>This conversation reminds me of others I’ve heard:</li>
</ol>
<p>My immigrant grandma who’d always ask us, “Is he a P.H.Doctor or the kind who can do me some good?”</p>
<p>Bill Cosby, Ed.D., who as a stand-up comedian early in his career described himself as lying needful in a Philadelphia hospital, seeing only a resident running down the hall. Needing help, Cosby hailed the resident, “Hey, You!! Almost a doctor!!”</p>
<ol>
<li>Putting female names first? That’s true only as a salutation for the inside of a social note, such as thank you note or reply card: Dear Mary and James, Thank you for the outrageous vase.</li>
</ol>
<p>For the outside envelope it’s boys first: James and Mary Lastname, or if you must, Mr. and Mrs. James Lastname (my least favorite form).</p>
<p>Anyway: boys first on the envelope, girls first inside as the note is written.</p>
<p>Kind of like having a bulldog protecting your doorway, I guess.</p>
<ol>
<li>Ph.D.'s are correctly (IMHO) resentful of people using honorary doctorate degrees to dub themselves “Dr. Soandso.”</li>
</ol>
<p>My H has an honorary doctorate, awarded by his seminary after 25 consecutive years of congregational service. He’s Sammy Spaceout, D.D. The D.D. stands for Doctor of Divinity. The congregation likes to see it on the sign outside the door as the two initials after his name. </p>
<p>Our kids like to sing, “the doctor of divinity who resides in the vicinity” like the Gilbert and Sullivan lyric.</p>
<p>He would never use that honorary degree when there are PhD’s in the congregation because they feel his isn’t earned the same way as his. He didn’t defend a dissertation or do original research. I believe the seminaries see that writing a weekly sermon for 25 years and surviving congregational politics equates to what a PhD does in terms of original research, just spread out over all those years.</p>
<ol>
<li>Chedva, I always thought lawyers were being modest when they decline to use their Juris Doctor to call themselves Dr. Soandso. Why not do it? Can you do your usual reasoned clarification for me on that, if you care to? With law school requring 3 years and medical school 4 years + residency year, it seems to me the J.D.'s are getting a thin deal here.</li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unless I’m remembering wrong, I think once they’ve passed 4th year med school exams, they are “doctors.” The residency fills specialty requirements and hospital requirements.</p>
<p>Interestingly, in Germany, students go directly to med school as undergrads. (I was told it’s about 6½ years.) They don’t receive their “MD” at that point but they are able to practice medicine and are generally called “doctor,” anyway. Most continue on to get their MD. At the point where they are licensed (or whatever) to teach medicine, rather than just practice it, they are called Professor. (If you’re sick in Germany, try to get a professor rather than a doctor. It’s a higher rank.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not Chedva, but can probably answer this question. The whole J.D. issue is sort of an extension of the history of schools granting an M.D… The J.D. is also a first professional degree and strictly speaking is not a doctorate degree in the technical definition of the term. US law schools used to just issue bachelors or masters level degrees, but the fashion then started to issue ‘doctorate’ degrees… even though the requirements for the degree didn’t really change. As with physicians, outside the US lawyers generally are awarded a masters or bachelors level degree (even though they get the same level of training). </p>
<p>Because the medical profession in the US started issuing self-invented MD degrees, and they were being called ‘Dr.’, it’s then assumed that those with the JD degree are also ‘Dr.’. The US Department of Education does not consider the JD to be equal to the PhD and instead considers it a professional qualification. For example, government pay scales classify a JD as having a ‘masters’ level degree and thus list at a lower pay grade than one with a ‘doctorate’ degree (e.g. PhD). </p>
<p>One can, of course, get a PhD in law if they complete the additional requirements for a traditional doctorate. </p>
<p>Although I suppose someone with a JD could style themselves as ‘Dr.’ (and I wouldn’t really care), it’s certainly not too common. </p>
<p>Often lawyers will use the title of Esq., but this too isn’t technically correct (at least in terms of using it as an exclusive legal title). Esq. is simply a title assigned to adult males that haven’t earned or inherited any other title and thus addressing someone as First Last, Esq. is just a fancy way of saying Mr… Before getting my PhD I spent some time in Europe and would often receive letters and formal invitations addressed to me as Esq. because at that time I had no other title.</p>
<p>^ ah. So Esquire is a subtitle.</p>
<p>You really didn’t do anything wrong:</p>
<p>[-</a> A Doctorate in Rudeness - washingtonpost.com](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/25/AR2007122501110.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns]-”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/25/AR2007122501110.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>These days, however, it’s becoming much more common as well as acceptable to address PhDs as Dr. on a social invitation, though by no means is it required as not all PhDs use Dr. socially or even professionally. Nevertheless, my advice in a situation where there’s doubt as to the person’s preference would be to use it - that way there’s no risk of offending. </p>
<p>[Emily</a> Post Institute—Forms of Address](<a href=“http://www.emilypost.com/everyday/forms_of_address.htm]Emily”>http://www.emilypost.com/everyday/forms_of_address.htm)</p>
<p>I have not read all the posts with care so please forgive any oversight. JDs are never addressed as doctors. In the UK, the medical degree is MBBS or MBchB but the holders are addressed as doctors. For centuries, the convention in the UK was for the surgeons to be titled and called, “Mr” and the physicians as “Dr.”. Now, both are doctors.</p>
<p>In the US, socially only MDs are called doctors. PhDs use the title in academia alone. All social invitations are addressed as Mr. John smith and Mrs. John Smith if you want to be very proper. For professional invitations etc, John Smith, Ph.D or susan smith, MD takes care of the prefix issue. Otherwise, the conventions for use of Miss, Ms. Mrs would be very confusing for the unenlightened. I suggest a detailed reading of the early editions of Post or Vanderbilt. Miss Manners also does a good job in her Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior.</p>
<p>As for Condi Rice is concerned, Secretary is the proper address on an envelope, Madame Secretary when you speak to her, and Dr. Rice when she participates in a seminar at the Woodrow Wilson Center. Her Brit counterpart would be Right Honorable if knighted or Foreign Secretary jack smith if no knighthood. Hope this helps.</p>