Use of the term "M.D." - academic or professional?

Factual Questions
1

Let’s say that someone has earned a medical degree outside of the U.S., and would be fully qualified to practice in his own country. Suppose further that his degree has been evaluated stateside and found to be academically equivalent to a degree earned in the U.S.

If this person has taken no further steps towards acquiring a license to practice, is he still entitled to call himself an “M.D.” here in the U.S.? Note – I’m not asking if he’s allowed to practice medicine, but whether he can legitimately claim to be an M.D.

2

I would think yes. The university made them an M.D. when the degree was granted.

3

Depends. If they’ve qualified as a doctor in Britain, they have a BMed, which is a different title but an equivalent qualification. To call themselves an MD would potentially be fraudulent, or open to accusations of being misleading?

4

Is there anything illegal about affixing “MD” to your name? I asked a similar question a while back (which has since disappeared) about “PhD,” and the consensus was “No, it’s not illegal.” In that specific case, someone had received a “PhD” from a local church, and referred to himself as “Dr. (whatever), PhD.”

But that was just a consensus, and I don’t know that anyone had a legal background to respond to it.

And now it’s gone.

5

GorillaMan has hit upon the crux of my question. We’ve already established (within the OP) that this person (let’s call him Joe) has a degree that is comparable to a U.S.-earned M.D. If, within the United States, Joe calls himself an M.D., does that necessarily imply that he is licensed to practice? If not, how can this be considered misrepresentation?

Just for comparison, can someone whose medical license has been revoked still call himself an M.D.?

6

I did a little looking and was somewhat surprised to find:

(Emphasis added) http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(tbjwk445asgkbe55xm1uxj2g))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-333-17011

State v. Thomas: http://www.kscourts.org/kscases/ctapp/2004/20040917/91403.htm (dentist enjoined from using “M.D.” despite possession of M.D. degree, where not a licensed physician)

7

I knew there was a reason I love this board so much. Thanks, Gfactor!

8

Not every state has the same rules, obviously:

New York:

http://www.op.nysed.gov/article131.htm

California:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=72152127008+6+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

Illinois:

225 ILCS 60/  Medical Practice Act of 1987.

Florida:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0458/SEC327.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0458->Section%20327#0458.327

9

All these legal quotes seem to be talking about somebody actually advertising themselves as a practicing physician. What about the OP’s question, where somebody not working in the medical field wants to use their academic qualification as a suffix in the way other graduates can?

10

On its face, the Michigan statute prohibits all use of the term M.D.

Also the Kansas case I cited says:

While Thomas was practicing a related field (dentistry) the court makes clear that he was not advertising himself as a practising physician. It found that the use of the term M.D. *was * the practice of medicine.

I don’t necessarily agree with the case, and some of what the court says is not necessary to its holding, but there it is.

Obviously, there are First Amendment implications here, but the lines are blurry.

Statutes are collected in Michael H. Cohen, A Fixed Star in Health Care Reform: The Emerging Paradigm of Holistic Healing, 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 79 (1995), which summarizes these provisions:

This summary supports GorillaMan’s comment, but fails to account for the Michigan statute or the Kansas decision, or at least possible broad readings of either one.

OTOH, I doubt a person using M.D. in the fashion described would get much of a reaction from regulators or prosecutors.

11

Hmmm, this really makes me wonder about MD/PhD’s. IIRC, quite a few of these “medical scientists” never bother to obtain licenses to practice medicine because they’ve chosen to enter a career centered around academics and research, and yet they often identify themselves as MD/PhD’s. I wonder if they’re technically in violation of any of these statutes.

12

I was wondering the same thing. A fair number of people that have genuine U.S. university M.D. degrees never get their licenses to practice medicine. Some of them are researchers while others become very highly paid medical malpractice attorneys (dual medical and law degrees) and all sorts of other odd things. To me, the M.D. just says that someone was granted a degree designated with the letters M.D. and it doesn’t convey a license or competency to practice medicine because those are separate issues. Not all medical doctors have an M.D. either. Doctors of Osteopathy (D.O.) are medical doctors as well and they have a different academic degree.

M.D. <> licensed medical doctor in either direction in my mind.

13

Seems like they could have problems not only in Kansas, and maybe Michigan, but some other places too. OTOH, I’ve never heard of an MD/PhD getting into trouble.

I agree.

There’s a separate issue about whether DOs can call themselves MDs.

14

In the US:

MD or DO: Physicians (Alleopathic and Osteopathic)

In the UK-phillic Schools:

MBBS, ChB: Physician, Surgeon

In the US:

Paramedical/Non-physician Creds:
PA: Physician’s Assistant (After post-bacc degree)
APRN/CNP: Advanced Practice RN/Certified Nurse Practitioner (typically post MS or PhD)
RN: Registered Nurse (Usually post Bacc, sometimes post Associates)
LPN: Licensed Practical Nurse (post-associate)
DPM: Podiatrist
OD:Doctor of Optometry

Nontraditional(US):
DC: Doctor of Chiropractic
ND: Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine

The US professional doctorates are generally not research focused, and include:
JD: Juris Doctor (Law)
EdD: Doctor of Education (usu Educational Admin)
DBA: Doctor of Business Administration

The standard US research degrees are the PhD and ScD, period. Additionally, the US supports post-doc work.

In Europe and the UK, there are sometimes at least two levels of research doctorates…

In short, the convention in the US is to not use the “Dr.” title gratuitously outside of work environments. A person insisting on being “Doctored” outside of their work environment is generally being pretentious and annoying.

Physicians trained in the US model earn an MD or a DO. Physicians trained elsewhere earn something else, but a credentialled physician is generally “Doctored” in medical or clinical settings. The degree doesn’t really make you a “Doctor” per se, but rather a combination of medical licensing and completed residencies and fellowships. The MD/DO/MBBS is the entry ticket.

15

Really?

16

Are there? Are you sure you’re not confusing a PhD with an MPhil which is what you get if you don’t qualify for the PhD?

17

In Russia and the other former Soviet countries, you have the “low PhD”, which is called кандидат наук (Candidate of Sciences), and the “high PhD”, which is called доктор наук (Doctor of Sciences). Each requires a dissertation defense. The former is effectively a Western-style PhD, while the latter is more like getting tenure - in order to be accepted into a Doctoral program, you have to present significant work that you’ve done as a postdoc.

18

Ah…with you now…

19

Yes, in the European traditions, there are “lower” and “higher” earned doctorates.

In Germany, there is a Ph.D., and a Dr.Habil. The Dr.Habil is a higher degree than the Ph.D.

20

That’s why I queried your statement - you said this included the UK, where this isn’t the case.