response to Michael Ridenhour

Vantil at gnn.com Vantil at gnn.com
Wed Jan 31 21:44:32 EST 1996


Michelle, I know what you are saying, and I agree that the situation is 
difficult. I do not have any answers, and if I did they would be outdated in 
today's socialist atmosphere. Look what is happening to the medical 
profession. They are being squeezed by the third party payers and the 
government into accepting payments far below what they think they are worth. 
This will happen to us for a far more sinister reason. Those who want a 
"medical" Au.D. are not sincere in their pushing for it, they are pulling a 
Clinton, which is to say they are dragging out the process until it dies. 
What they are accomplishing is the gradual irrelevancy of audiology. The 
future of hearing testing is in audiometrists and the future of hearing aid 
dispensing is with the ENTs. Were we to gain equality by fiat, as other 
professions have done, declaring ourselves to be competent, rather than 
asking for others to declare us competent, than we would have a chance in 
audiology remaining a quasi-independent profession. The jealous Ph. D.s, (as 
opposed to those Ph. D.s with a brain), will delay us long enough that 
questions like yours will be moot. There will be no profession and only 
technicians doing our job. I went into private practice so that the 
remaining years of audiology can be spent building up a personal patient 
base to rely on for my latter years. The odd thing is, now I get loads of 
calls from ENTs and other physicians asking my opinions on various medical 
diagnoses relating to hearing and/or the temporal lobe. When I was at the 
hospital, I was just another nurse-type, to be treated as an inferior. One 
guy (M.D.) even introduces me as Dr. Ridenhour, as it enhances his prestige 
to have my opinions expressed. This datum will slay the Ph. D.s, but so 
what?

ain't life a hoot?

Michael Ridenhour




More information about the Audiolog mailing list