By signing this petition, I signify my agreement with the outlined intent, purpose, and expectations; I feel that students need additional information to form a more educated opinion about the proposed single graduate medical education accreditation system before supporting the SOMA resolution; I agree with some or all of the listed reasons to delay and I request that the AOA cease all negotiations with the ACGME until students can become better educated about the merger and student approval can be reassessed.
Background: The Student Osteopathic Medical Association (SOMA) plans to submit a resolution to the American Osteopathic Association’s (AOA) House of Delegates recommending that the AOA proceed with entry into a single graduate medical education accreditation system. This resolution has been labeled by many Osteopathic medical students as hurried, unrepresentative of their best interests, and threatening to the future well-being and uniqueness of Osteopathic medicine. At the root of this issue appears minimal education about the merger, inadequate research and predictive modeling on the merger’s impact, and suggestions from some student leadership to support the merger, prior to correction of these issues.
Intent: To quantify the current number of Osteopathic medical students who oppose SOMA’s proposed resolution and outline reasonable expectations for SOMA/AOA leadership prior to proceeding with the merger
Purpose: To encourage SOMA leadership to recognize the significant amount of student opposition to the merger and delay their decision to support until more information can be gathered and education regarding the merger and its potential shortcomings can be properly disseminated to all Osteopathic medical students
Reasons to Delay:
§ The current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has several significant omissions that must be addressed prior to approval, including: recognition of the COMLEX-USA as equivalent to meet criteria for admission into the unified GME programs; a requirement that osteopathic board certification exams will be recognized as equivalent to the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) certification exams; that the unified programs recognize AOA board certification on an equal basis with ABMS certification for the positions of program director, director of medical education, and designated institutional review officer without requiring an exception to be granted.
§ The current MOU has several potential sequelae that have not been fully studied, including: reducing the number of current residency slots; making access to current residency slots more challenging for Osteopathic graduates; reducing membership in AOA specialty colleges and the AOA itself; future expectations that Osteopathic medical schools conform to Allopathic school regulations under the Liasion Committee on Medical Education (LCME).
§ The ramifications of this merger actually go beyond the parameters of the MOU between the AOA and the ACGME and the future impact on Osteopathic medicine cannot be properly anticipated
§ Students need better information to be prepared and shared with them to improve their understanding of the merger and, subsequently, solidify their opinions
Expectations for SOMA/AOA leadership:
§ Appoint a committee to oversee the collection, analysis, and publication of student, physician, and other third party, expert opinions about the merger, both in support and opposition
§ Prepare educational literature based on the information received to be shared with all Osteopathic medical students to encourage thought, discussion, and unbiased opinion formation
§ Following discussion, reassess overall student opinion with collection, analysis, and publication of data that: accurately reflects student approval of the current MOU and provides more objective information to properly guide a resolution for the AOA House of Delegates, whether in support or opposition
Updates
June 26, 2014
Reaching this point in our movement feels heavy given how much resistance we face. It is clear that so many of us are struggling to be seen while our future remains uncertain. I am exhausted by the silence from those in charge but your collective frustration keeps me moving forward.
Reached 100 supporters
June 26, 2014
29 Comments
While I am in favor of the merger as an "ideal to strive for," I have to agree that there are too many unknowns. Since the memorandum was released, I do have concerns about the merger and some of its implications for the Osteopathic profession. We need more information before an informed decision can be reached.
I would also love to hear real facts abou the merger. I really think in the long run this will be very bad for the DO profession but everyone answers questions very superficially.
I'm not against the merger, I simply don't understand and have not felt properly informed to the effects it will inevitably have on my prospects of applying as an Osteopathic, COMLEX-taking, medical student. These effects seem clear for Allopathic, USMLE-taking, medical students: more available residency spots. But the future for Osteopathic students is unclear at best, and bleak in the views of many of my classmates.
You bring up an interesting point "James". Personally, I find it disconcerting that "65 year old DOs" are negotiating a merger that affects our future without researching all of the possible implications or sharing all of the information with us. This petition does not seek to quash the merger, it requests due diligence through research and dissemination of information.
Time will heal most wounds, but I feel like this statement comes more from older, practicing DOs. From talking with my peers, we feel that older DOs worry more about discrimination, whereas our generation is more worried about getting AOA representatives that represent our needs, not that of the 65 year old DOs with chips on their shoulders.
Thank you for a thoughtful and productive response. You make some good points, and this is a good productive conversation for us to have. My thoughts follow: Q: I read through the FAQ material and none of it addresses the issue of residencies that can't meet the ACGME requirements. A: Residencies that don’t meet ACGME requirements have until 2020 to make the changes necessary to meet the requirements. ACGME will not deny accreditation of a program based solely on program size. And the ACGME will charge one fee for the entire application process-which would include reapplication or assistance in reaching accreditation. Q: The requirements are not a simple checklist. Some of them demand costs that some residency programs in smaller communities and hospitals cannot meet ($6200 starting fee plus an annual $4,300 to $5,200 fee for ACGME vs. a one time $3,200 fee for AOA accredited residencies). A: The negotiations have addressed this and the fee schedule was modified for osteopathic GME programs. The fees are comparable, but not the same. If a program applies for preaccreditation, and then does not receive accreditation, they will not be charged for re-evaluation later on. So the cost structure is different. The AOA also has annual fees for OGME programs, based upon the number of residents per program. Q: Will ACGME give them a waiver? A: The ACGME fees are comparable to AOA fees. Waivers can be requested. Q: The one Q&A that should have addressed this issue only boasted the hypothesized benefits of the merger possibly increasing the number of residencies. A: Unification of GME is one step to make it easier for GME development. The unification process is not designed to increase program numbers, it is designed to make the system less formidable and more consistent so that GME development can occur. Getting hospitals to appreciate the value of GME and feel that the requirements to enter the world of GME will be less confusing
we need more info!
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via . Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Copy link or share directly
By signing this petition, I signify my agreement with the outlined intent, purpose, and expectations; I feel that students need additional information to form a more educated opinion about the proposed single graduate medical education accreditation system before supporting the SOMA resolution; I agree with some or all of the listed reasons to delay and I request that the AOA cease all negotiations with the ACGME until students can become better educated about the merger and student approval can be reassessed.
Background: The Student Osteopathic Medical Association (SOMA) plans to submit a resolution to the American Osteopathic Association’s (AOA) House of Delegates recommending that the AOA proceed with entry into a single graduate medical education accreditation system. This resolution has been labeled by many Osteopathic medical students as hurried, unrepresentative of their best interests, and threatening to the future well-being and uniqueness of Osteopathic medicine. At the root of this issue appears minimal education about the merger, inadequate research and predictive modeling on the merger’s impact, and suggestions from some student leadership to support the merger, prior to correction of these issues.
Intent: To quantify the current number of Osteopathic medical students who oppose SOMA’s proposed resolution and outline reasonable expectations for SOMA/AOA leadership prior to proceeding with the merger
Purpose: To encourage SOMA leadership to recognize the significant amount of student opposition to the merger and delay their decision to support until more information can be gathered and education regarding the merger and its potential shortcomings can be properly disseminated to all Osteopathic medical students
Reasons to Delay:
§ The current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has several significant omissions that must be addressed prior to approval, including: recognition of the COMLEX-USA as equivalent to meet criteria for admission into the unified GME programs; a requirement that osteopathic board certification exams will be recognized as equivalent to the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) certification exams; that the unified programs recognize AOA board certification on an equal basis with ABMS certification for the positions of program director, director of medical education, and designated institutional review officer without requiring an exception to be granted.
§ The current MOU has several potential sequelae that have not been fully studied, including: reducing the number of current residency slots; making access to current residency slots more challenging for Osteopathic graduates; reducing membership in AOA specialty colleges and the AOA itself; future expectations that Osteopathic medical schools conform to Allopathic school regulations under the Liasion Committee on Medical Education (LCME).
§ The ramifications of this merger actually go beyond the parameters of the MOU between the AOA and the ACGME and the future impact on Osteopathic medicine cannot be properly anticipated
§ Students need better information to be prepared and shared with them to improve their understanding of the merger and, subsequently, solidify their opinions
Expectations for SOMA/AOA leadership:
§ Appoint a committee to oversee the collection, analysis, and publication of student, physician, and other third party, expert opinions about the merger, both in support and opposition
§ Prepare educational literature based on the information received to be shared with all Osteopathic medical students to encourage thought, discussion, and unbiased opinion formation
§ Following discussion, reassess overall student opinion with collection, analysis, and publication of data that: accurately reflects student approval of the current MOU and provides more objective information to properly guide a resolution for the AOA House of Delegates, whether in support or opposition
Updates
June 26, 2014
Reaching this point in our movement feels heavy given how much resistance we face. It is clear that so many of us are struggling to be seen while our future remains uncertain. I am exhausted by the silence from those in charge but your collective frustration keeps me moving forward.
Reached 100 supporters
June 26, 2014
29 Comments
Despite the AOA's offer to open its GME positions to allopathic graduates, there has been no mention of any promise on the part of the ACGME to reduce the discrimination against osteopathic graduates that exists in certain specialties. My attempts to contact the AOA regarding this issue have thus far gone unanswered. It is not enough to merely tell us that this is good for our profession. I am not opposed to the merger completely but would like for the AOA to treat us with some respect and provide more information about a process that will have a very large impact on our careers.
While I am in favor of the merger as an "ideal to strive for," I have to agree that there are too many unknowns. Since the memorandum was released, I do have concerns about the merger and some of its implications for the Osteopathic profession. We need more information before an informed decision can be reached.
I would also love to hear real facts abou the merger. I really think in the long run this will be very bad for the DO profession but everyone answers questions very superficially.
I'm not against the merger, I simply don't understand and have not felt properly informed to the effects it will inevitably have on my prospects of applying as an Osteopathic, COMLEX-taking, medical student. These effects seem clear for Allopathic, USMLE-taking, medical students: more available residency spots. But the future for Osteopathic students is unclear at best, and bleak in the views of many of my classmates.
You bring up an interesting point "James". Personally, I find it disconcerting that "65 year old DOs" are negotiating a merger that affects our future without researching all of the possible implications or sharing all of the information with us. This petition does not seek to quash the merger, it requests due diligence through research and dissemination of information.
Time will heal most wounds, but I feel like this statement comes more from older, practicing DOs. From talking with my peers, we feel that older DOs worry more about discrimination, whereas our generation is more worried about getting AOA representatives that represent our needs, not that of the 65 year old DOs with chips on their shoulders.
Thank you for a thoughtful and productive response. You make some good points, and this is a good productive conversation for us to have. My thoughts follow: Q: I read through the FAQ material and none of it addresses the issue of residencies that can't meet the ACGME requirements. A: Residencies that don’t meet ACGME requirements have until 2020 to make the changes necessary to meet the requirements. ACGME will not deny accreditation of a program based solely on program size. And the ACGME will charge one fee for the entire application process-which would include reapplication or assistance in reaching accreditation. Q: The requirements are not a simple checklist. Some of them demand costs that some residency programs in smaller communities and hospitals cannot meet ($6200 starting fee plus an annual $4,300 to $5,200 fee for ACGME vs. a one time $3,200 fee for AOA accredited residencies). A: The negotiations have addressed this and the fee schedule was modified for osteopathic GME programs. The fees are comparable, but not the same. If a program applies for preaccreditation, and then does not receive accreditation, they will not be charged for re-evaluation later on. So the cost structure is different. The AOA also has annual fees for OGME programs, based upon the number of residents per program. Q: Will ACGME give them a waiver? A: The ACGME fees are comparable to AOA fees. Waivers can be requested. Q: The one Q&A that should have addressed this issue only boasted the hypothesized benefits of the merger possibly increasing the number of residencies. A: Unification of GME is one step to make it easier for GME development. The unification process is not designed to increase program numbers, it is designed to make the system less formidable and more consistent so that GME development can occur. Getting hospitals to appreciate the value of GME and feel that the requirements to enter the world of GME will be less confusing
we need more info!
Help this petition grow
Share it with friends to help reach 250 signatures.
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via .
Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
Signing with Google or Facebook verifies your signature instantly — no email needed.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
Despite the AOA's offer to open its GME positions to allopathic graduates, there has been no mention of any promise on the part of the ACGME to reduce the discrimination against osteopathic graduates that exists in certain specialties. My attempts to contact the AOA regarding this issue have thus far gone unanswered. It is not enough to merely tell us that this is good for our profession. I am not opposed to the merger completely but would like for the AOA to treat us with some respect and provide more information about a process that will have a very large impact on our careers.