posted
Question 1: Is there any test analogous to the bar exam that you must take in order to be able to practice law in the US?
Question 2: Can you legally practice law if you've passed the bar exam but never went to law school? Similarly, it possible to legally practice medicine without a diploma?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
#1--Uhh, the bar exam is what you have to pass to practice law. I don't get the question.
#2--For practicing law, I think it varies according to state law. I know in Georgia you can not go to law school, "read law" as it's called, take and pass the bar, and legally practice law. In practice, it's almost unheard of. I think there have only been a handful of people that did it in the past 20 years in Georgia.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
1) *confused* Do you mean is there a federal bar exam? I don't believe there is - you have to pass the bar in every state you wish to practice.
2) In some states. You can in Virginia - it's called "reading the law" and you have to work at a law firm without compensation for a certain number of years. My impression is that a few people do it, but mostly those who work at family law firms.
I don't know about medicine, but I doubt that you can practice without a diploma no matter if you can pass the boards.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
As for question 2, the answer is no, at least in most states. The answer to the second part is also no, though there are a few routes that can let you practice medicine without an MD (notably, as a Nurse Practitioner, which usually requires a masters degree in nursing or similar).
One thing I am strongly for is opening up the ability to practice law to those who manage to pass the bar (or a bar, I'm not saying it has to be the same as the current tests), and for opening up at least some areas of medical practice to people with less than an MD and extensive practical experience (anesthesiology, for instance).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think 4 or 5 states allow reading the law in lieu of law school.
In most (probably all) states, you cannot even take the bar exam unless you have met the educational requirements (law school or reading the law).
Passing the bar in and of itself is insufficient to demonstrate that one is qualified to be a lawyer. It tests a very small subset of the necessary skills. The additional educational requirements serve to fill in many of those gaps.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree. I think, though, that one who did not possess the necessary skills would probably become quickly evident. I also think that some people who pass through a law school do not possess the necessary skills. I further think that the law school requirement creates an unnecessary barrier to entry that keeps legal costs higher than they might otherwise be (and, since it is usually the only route to practicing law, law school tuitions higher than they otherwise might be).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: In the United States and its territories, the individual medical licensing authorities ("state medical boards") of the various jurisdictions grant a license to practice medicine. Each medical licensing authority sets its own rules and regulations and requires passing an examination that demonstrates qualification for licensure. Results of the USMLE are reported to these authorities for use in granting the initial license to practice medicine. The USMLE provides them with a common evaluation system for applicants for initial medical licensure.
posted
My brother in law went to an Osteopathic school but is taking the Boards for both Osteopathic and Allopathic.
The Boards never seem to end. Taking Medical boards seems to be much more involved than the Bar exam, which as far as I can tell, is a one shot deal per state.
Or maybe all the people I know becoming doctors are just having a really hard time passing the Boards.
But I'm pretty sure there are so many Boards because they cover different aspects of practice.
Maybe the practice is to schedule a medical student for a Board on any occasion when they might want to spend time with extended family. That seems to generally be the case. Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know there are some graduate programs in which you can get a dual PhD and MD (my brother is considering a couple such programs). I don't know the specifics, so I don't know what else would be required to allow you to practice medicine in such a case (besides the medical licensing).
Posts: 5879 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You do a whole PhD program and a whole MD program, or at least that's the way they were working back in the early 90's.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mds also need to do internships and residencies, which would not be part of the md/phd. Also, from what I have heard, they fast track you on the phd part. For a phd, what qualifies as a phd is very loosely defined. In biochem, in most programs I looked into, the classwork is completely finished in two years and then there is research for the rest. The research part can expand or shrink based on your boss, so in just my dept, there are labs that routinely graduate in 4 years, and others that take 8 (my lab unfortunately is an 8 year one). We also have advisors who will let you go with little actual research done if they know you are going on to law school. So, in the md/phd program, from what I have heard, you end up with a less substantial thesis (which in my mind means absolutely nothing because no employer is actually going to care).
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
And in addition to USMLE there are board certification exams. However, physicians can still practice a certain specialty without being "board certified", but "board eligible".
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: One thing I am strongly for is opening up the ability to practice law to those who manage to pass the bar (or a bar, I'm not saying it has to be the same as the current tests), and for opening up at least some areas of medical practice to people with less than an MD and extensive practical experience (anesthesiology, for instance).
Already done. CRNAs (Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists) and AAs (Anesthesia Assistants) have extensive academic and clinical training (currently the entry level for CRNAs is Masters) and practice anesthesia. CRNAs can legally practice independently of MD anesthesiologists in many states.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't worry. We (CRNAs) aren't going anywhere. NPs and PAs are a strong front as well. I think with the growing healthcare needs there will be more and more mid-level providers, and they will become more specialized as the time goes by. Education requirements will increase too. CRNA education is shifting toward doctorate preparation, which I think is a great thing for our profession.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mds also need to do internships and residencies, which would not be part of the md/phd.
Yes, it is. It is exactly like a full Ph.D. program and a full M.D. program, and it takes forever and a half.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Internships and residencies aren't part of the any md program. For an md, you do 2 years or coursework, 2 years of clinical. Then in order to actually practice, you decide your specialty and apply for that specialty. Some programs go straight to resident, and some call the next step intern (depends on specialty and program). There are also fellowships after that (depending on specialty). The md/phd program is between 6-8 years (the ones I looked into). Considering that there are many phd students who take 8 years, and some 9 or 10, this isn't that bad a deal. I thought about doing md/phd and people talked me out of it. Now,I can't help but think, I could have had both an md and a phd for the amount of time I have worked on just a phd (and I still don't have one).
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, it's possible to drag out the md phd process. The person I watched go through it took over 10 years. No one can make you write a dissertation, that would rather defeat the point.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
MCCQE I (the first of the 2 Canadian exams) *** this is a quick, easy and free way to see what these exams are like just by using your internet browsing program (click on red hyperlinks)***
The examinations test clinical judgment, so it isn't a matter of just knowing the science material (the amount of which is huge, by the way). You also need to be able to judge what is and is not relevant in a given clinical scenario -- that is, questions about what to do in a given case may have multiple right answers, but only one correct "most important" or "best next step" answer. This is the sort of information it is extremely difficult to learn outside of a clinically-based training situation, such as apprenticeship in a hospital.
-----------------------------
Medical practice is more complex than just having passed the appropriate exams, as there is the matter of licensing.
1. To practice medicine in the US, you need to be licensed in the state you chose to practice in or in a nearby state which has a specific quid pro quo licensing agreement.
2. To be licensed, the requirements vary from state to state. Generally, you need to be either in an approved and closely monitored training program (i.e., an "educational license," and not all residencies or fellowships are recognized for such) after having passed the USMLE I and II exams, or you need to have been vetted for an individual license after having passed the USMLE I, II, and III exams.
--2a. Most states require that you have graduated from medical school (i.e., have the MD degree, which is an educational degree like the BA or BS of undergraduate -- it attests to having fulfilled the course requirements, nothing to do with licensing per se), and they require transcripts to be sent directly from the institutions involved.
--2b. Most states also require that you have successfully completed at least two years in an accredited training program (i.e., a residency with close clinical supervision to train and assess your clinical judgement in real-world situations, among other things).
--2c. In order to sit for the USMLE exams, you must be a student at or have graduated from an accredited medical school anyway.
-------------------------
There is a similar process for Canada. Since it isn't likely to be of interest to you, mr_porteiro_head, I won't detail it here. If it will be useful to you or someone else, just let me know.
I included links to the formal website practice questions above. You can also find many texts in medical school bookstores that have practice questions.
Here is a breakdown of USMLE Step I content. The sidebar includes more information about content coverage for each subsystem.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: As for question 2, the answer is no, at least in most states. The answer to the second part is also no, though there are a few routes that can let you practice medicine without an MD (notably, as a Nurse Practitioner, which usually requires a masters degree in nursing or similar).
A Nurse Practioner does not "practice medicine," but rather practices nursing in an expanded role. It is an awesome and sorely needed role, and the training is both rigorous and thorough, but it is not medical training. This may seem to be a matter of jargon, but it isn't; these terms carry weight, and they are highly regulated by law.
This is generally accepted in the professional literature of both fields (e.g., "The profession needs to reaffirm that NPs are nurses who are acting in an expanded role, not nurses who practice medicine," from Theory-based Nurse Practitioner Practice), but sometimes even professionals use the term "to practice medicine" metaphorically. I do think that is risky and inaccurate, though.
---
Another option is the Physician's Assistant role. PAs do indeed practice medicine, but can only do so under the oversight of a licensed physician. Some PAs do have a lot of autonomy, but there is always an assigned licensed MD to oversee the work and to call on for backup.
If someone wants to practice medicine but does not want (or is not able) to commit to the full training process for autonomous practice, a PA job might well be the way to go. Most PA training is only 2 years on top of whatever college work is required for the program.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
