I’m unimpressed by that editorial’s offhand reference to an online test administered by Paul’s organization. As noted, NBO doesn’t have a website, it’s standards aren’t published, and its officers (ie, Paul’s wife & father-in-law, can’t answer questions about it. The seven people Gerth contacted about the NBO’s certification refused to discuss what was involved. (The only seven people he could find, you’ll recall.)
Also, Paul’s comment to the WaPo just says that a group of younger ophthalmologists agreed that everyone should get re-certified regularly. That doesn’t mean that Paul’s group is actually doing so, or what their process or standards are.
I think you were right the first time, Boyo Jim. I think this is just a power play to try and weasel out of the re-certification fees by pressuring the older docs rather than a principled objection. And even if I buy the objection (I can see both sides) I still think it’s pretty fishy to make up your own certification board consisting of you, your wife & her dad, give yourself a ‘test’, and then announce that you qualified.
If you Google “National Board of Opthamology”, do do find a few doctors’ practices websites listing it among their certifications, but you have to go 3 or 4 pages in.
Yea, you’d think that the point of joining such a board would be to have your name on a public list of doctors that have been vetted by said organization.
As others have said, he does not need to be certified by the actual ABMS board to practice as an ophthalmologist, but most hospitals would require him to be before giving him privileges (unless, ironically, he grandfathered in). There’s nothing stopping him from calling himself “board-certified”, but it pushes some limits, IMO.
Of course, the libertarians would tell us that this is how all professional regulation should work–competing voluntary organizations that build reputations and are as open about their standards as they want to be, which people can regard or disregard at their will. In this case, it would work exactly as intended–I would not see Dr. Paul as a patient, nor would I refer my patients to him.
You got to give him credit for living up to his principles. Libertarians seem to operate under caveat emptor - if someone psuedo-certified by his board hurts a patient, they could just say the patient should have researched his qualifications better - and so it is the patient’s fault.
I want to take this opportunity toDopers to join my “National Judean Opthamologist Front”. All you need to do is send me $50 for annual certification along with the answer to the following question (which isn’t TWO hard):
How many eyes does a normal healthy human being have?
Once recieved you will recieve an email with your certification and a chance to win a free iPad!
The National Front of Judean Opthamology is giving away a Big Daddy deep fryer, and doesn’t discriminate against the differently sighted, like a couple other groups I could mention.
FWIW, ophthalmology is the NRA of medical specialties. They are extremely active politically, give money to politicians in their favor at a high rate and mount active campaigns against those they oppose. The reason is because they’re always fighting to keep the optometrists in check. So they are very big on challenging anything an optometrist does except figure out a prescription for glasses as practicing medicine without a license.