I WOULD LIKE EVERYONE TO NOTE:
In all of the cases below the earned entitlement was done
through a UNIVERSITY of A STATE LICENSURE BOARD. Hence
it it legal to use the designator as Doctor.
THE "aud" FROM AFA IS THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT CREDENTIALLING
therefore it is illegal to use the designator
because it is impersonating an earned degree from
and you cannot call yourself a DOCTOR
unless it is from a university or state licensure board.
That is why the optometry, law, and pharmacy models
worked because they were done legally!
Unlike the AFA's "aud".
Please do not make the following comparision made
below to the AFA's "aud". It is totally INACCURATE!
My all of this shouting I must be getting nodules!
> It's interesting to read the materials sent with the Application for
> Au.D. Credentialing regarding the history of Entitlement.
> "In the late 18th and 19th centuries various medical schools changed
> their degree from a Bachelor of Medicine (M.B.) to Doctor of Medicine
> (M.D.). Harvard University even granted complimentary M.D.'s to previous
> M.B. and as recently as 1970, the State of California allowed Doctors of
> Osteopathy (D.O.'s) to exchange their degree for a M.D. degree.
> Granding new titles has been utilized by a number of professions as a
> viable means and for a specific purpose, i.e. primarily to transform or
> transition thier professions to a doctoring profession. Each intitlement
> was not without controversy and usually was approached in a different
> form for each profession that was consistent with the needs and
> particular circumstances of the majority of the profession"
> We learn of similar transistions for the Doctor of Optometry degree,
> Podiatry, Juris Doctor etc. In 1987, the State of Arkansas Pharmacy
> Licensure Bord enactied legislation allowing all licensed pharmacists to
> use the designator P.D. and the title doctor of pharmacy even if they
> have not earned the doxtor of pharmacy degree. There was no opposition
> in the state legislature to this action. In 1991, the nation's three
> largest pharmacy practitioner associations, representing well over
> 200,000 pharmacy practitioners, released a consensus position statement
> supporting the "new" doctor of pharmacy degree and encouraging the
> nation's colleges of pharmacy to develop a degree transfer process for
> B.S. degreed harmacists. They further stated that, "for current B.S.
> degree pharmacists whose calleges do not provide degree transfer,
> pharmacy's professional associations will develop an institute for the
> purpose of granting a Certificate of PHarm D. Equivalence."
> THE PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET, THE TIME IS RIGHT!!!
> It seems to me that it is high time for the profesional audiologists to
> wake up to the needs of our times. We have the potential of becoming an
> autonomous profession. Why would anyone not want that for the profession
> that we have dedicated our lives to?
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Type: text/plain
> From: "mikey" <gandalf at infi.net>
> Newsgroups: bionet.audiology
> Subject: Re: AFA's Au.D.
> Date: 11 Nov 1996 03:51:33 GMT
> Organization: InfiNet
> Message-ID: <01bbcf83$ac7d9f80$904498ce at sancho-panza>
> References: <01bbcd41$6558b020$444498ce at sancho-panza> <19961109202700.PAA21000 at ladder01.news.aol.com>
> Guess you don't have Dr. Golf or Rug Doctor in your benighted state.
> Your loss.
> mikey (%^)
>audmcl at aol.com wrote in article
> <19961109202700.PAA21000 at ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> > Don't need a law degree in NJ to know that you cannot use the title
> > "doctor" in NJ unless it is earned from an institution accredited to
> > confer a doctorate. The wording on this is so simple that even a Ph.D.
> > might understand it.
Thank you for your support,
dybala at utdallas.eduhttp://www.utdallas.edu/~dybala