.jpg)
Every time I hear or read about the AMA meddling in our affairs, I must confess: I get more and more worried about our future. Their constant open disdain of our profession so openly seen on various platforms not only troubles me but should also the rest of us. However, and quite frankly, I am surprised to see just a few in our community denounce them. Even if nothing else, I’m sure most PAs have felt the sting of these disinformed one-sided campaigns targeting our brand.
But just as if this is not enough, the current marketplace is changing at a rapid pace potentially where the perception and the stigma of being an "assistant" have never been more detrimental to our livelihoods. For instance, the AMA behind the scene attempts to block or lobby against any PA modernization practice acts. By far the most disturbing and disheartening politics of their rhetoric is how to attempt to sow fear and distrust in the medical consumer. Clearly, they seek to undermine our credibility at every turn they can by deliberately overstepping their industry role by simply fostering PA practice advancement barriers.
Similarly, and nefariously they have undertaken other lobbying efforts to jeopardize similar PA practice modernization bills throughout the country all under the mantra of "patient safety". When asked directly about these interprofessional restricting marketplace activities, they always default to their skewed anecdotal statistics. They steadfastly continue claiming their actions were/are solely based in the interest of public safety despite the robust available data today, fifty years later proving our solid industry track record regarding comparable patient care outcomes--- a very solid one indeed.
Unfortunately, they have chosen to discredit the PA community through these unilateral overzealous partisan protectionistic lobbying moves without creating a spirit of collaboration or bipartisan dialogue. I/we do not believe this to be the trait of a transparent organization as they like to claim. Furthermore, I/we believe these lobbying activities are not appropriate nor in the best interest of creating a professional partnership between both groups.
It does appear, the role and mission of the AMA are incongruent if this is the stance they want to undertake. Furthermore, they are not a “regulatory governmental agency “ nor a “policing” agency but rather an association of an interprofessional group.
Perhaps, they should be reminded they are not in the business of trade restraint & or fomenting interprofessional dissension, but rather collaboratively increasing access to care.
Would you all please make your voices heard…
