Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive
To be honest, I've never really understood the objection to NPs. They're supervised by MDs, so one can assume that anything beyond their expertise will be discussed with their supervising MD. That is the way it works at the clinic that my wife and I go to, anyway. One MD, three NPs. We always have the option of being seen by the MD, but the fly in that particular ointment is that we might have to wait longer to be seen by the MD than by an NP, which is understandable.
Seems to work that way at other practices too. After successfully evading cardiologists for the past four years, my wife and our NP finally got me to agree to go to one, a guy who really seems on the ball. I'll be completing the tests this coming Monday. I've already scheduled the visit to discuss the test results: I was offered the option of seeing an NP for this (two weeks from now) or seeing the Cardiologist (mid-November). I picked November, as if anything untoward showed up on the tests that demanded attention before November I'd be called anyway.
|
I don't have any objection to NPs. But, many MDs have dedicated their life to the practice of medicine, and they do not merely consider it a job. And, they have malpractice insurance. There are NPs who are very dedicated, but there are many who consider their work to be just a job with a paycheck. I remember a few years ago, I went to an urgent care facility, and I was treated by a woman who had no identification on her clothes, and she didn't even offer to tell me her name. I had to ask for her name, but I still don't know what her qualifications were.