All Headlines >>
The RCVS has opened a consultation on the future of veterinary specialisation, which includes a proposal that the use of postnominals and titles by veterinary surgeons should be rationalised in order to avoid confusion amongst the public.
The proposals are submitted for comment by the RCVS Specialisation Working Party, which is chaired by former Chief Medical Officer Professor Sir Kenneth Calman.
The Working Party's review was precipitated by a finding that the structure of veterinary specialisation is "confusing and opaque" to both animal owners and the profession (Unlocking Potential - a Report on Veterinary Expertise in Food Animal Production, by Professor Philip Lowe, 2009).
The Working Party has explored the routes to RCVS Recognised Specialist status. It has also looked at the use of 'specialist' more broadly, given the fact that it is not a protected term in the veterinary field, and has considered animal owners' expectations of a 'specialist'.
The Working Party also makes proposals for encouraging more veterinary surgeons to become specialists, given that there are currently only 319 on the RCVS List of Recognised Specialists, out of a UK practising arm of the profession of some 17,400 veterinary surgeons.
The proposals from the Working Party could have far-reaching impact. One suggestion is that all those meeting the criteria for specialist status would also become Fellows of the RCVS (FRCVS) - a status currently only held by those who complete a thesis or exam, or who qualify on the basis of 'meritorious contributions to learning'. There are also proposals that the term 'RCVS Recognised Specialist' be dropped and replaced with the much simpler term 'specialist' or 'veterinary specialist'.
Further proposals include the introduction of a 'middle tier' of veterinary surgeons - potentially to be called 'advanced practitioners' - who would be below full specialist status and subject to periodic revalidation.
There are also recommendations that veterinary surgeons should be obliged to explain referral options to their clients, including the level of expertise of those to whom they are referring cases.
The future of the RCVS subject boards, which currently manage the various Certificate and Diploma examinations, is also considered in the proposals.
The emphasis throughout is on simplification and improvement, according to Professor Sir Kenneth Calman, who said: "New legislation to introduce statutory registration for veterinary specialists would no doubt make things clearer, as it is for doctors and dentists, but, in the meantime, we believe there are a number of actions which the RCVS could take to improve matters."
The consultation paper can be downloaded from www.rcvs.org.uk/consultations, and comments are welcomed from members of the public, veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses. The closing deadline for comments, which should be sent to RCVS Head of Education, Freda Andrews, on f.andrews@rcvs.org.uk, is Friday 9 December.
Comments received will be considered by the RCVS committees and Council in early 2012.
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vet nurses.
I don't agree with this at all, I feel veterinary surgeons work hard on extra courses and 'top up's' I feel they should be given the credit for it in their title. I do also feel that anyone working with a Veterinary Surgeon should know what the initials mean, and if asked should be able to tell the public. I personally always look up extra initials when I book any of my babies in to my local practice so I have a idea of who I am talking to and what they have specialist interest in. With my dogs as I could see that one of our local vets has interests in orthopaedics so booked straight in with him rather than someone with a interest in cardiology I am sure both where able to tell me the same information but I want my babies to see the best vet they could for their condition like I am sure every pet owner in England does. Maybe it would make more sense to have a list of initials and what these initials mean, which courses and at which level the veterinary surgeon has taken in order to receive these extra letters. I think it would be a great shame for hard working Veterinary surgeons to lose these initials as I know when I qualify I would be horrified if someone took away my RVN SA, and any extra titles I would feel I had earned. I do however agree with Alison MBVNA is a trivial title, maybe keep the titles to actual qualification. I think the choice should be there for the public to look up their vets professional interests.
(Sorry about the rant and most likely poor grammar and spelling)
Thankyou
WTF_Dinosaur (soon to be RVN SA)
I am absolutely in agreement with this. Titles are meaningless if they are jargonised to the profession they relate to...I find the public's general understanding, when faced with a list of initials (even MRCVS) is extremely poor. Most owners have not one jot of a clue as to what the titles mean...only that they must mean something and possibly the more the vet has the more qualified he/she must be? To how an example to this end, I was memorably advised by one client on seeing the multitide of letters after one surgeons name "Hmmm - only one more letter and we've got the alphabet there, no idea what they mean, do you?. Still it's a shame he made *****'s nail bleed when he clipped them. Don't suppose ****'s has got a certificate in that then?" ... I also believe that the more letters stated after a name can (not always) be a bit of an ego trip for the individual. I can safely say I am proud to put RVN after my name but have had the recent desire to also put MBVNA...not necessary really and it means nothing to my clients compared to RVN. So I am too not without ego...(I will stop as I've now 'outed' myself!). Toadster, RVN. (full stop!)