Veterinary groups say “No” to midlevel practitioner position
As Colorado voters begin voting in an election that will decide whether their state creates a new midlevel veterinary practitioner (MLP) position, more and more veterinary groups are stepping forward to say publicly that such positions are unneeded and dangerous. In fact, those who stand in opposition include more than 100 national and local veterinary, humane, and breeders’ organizations; veterinary clinics; veterinarians; veterinary technicians; and legislators—not to mention the majority of pet owners.
The American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA), American Board of Veterinary Practitioners (ABVP), and Student AVMA (SAVMA) Executive Board recently issued statements opposing creation of a midlevel position. In doing so, they joined numerous other veterinary organizations, including the AVMA and dozens of state and territorial veterinary associations, who oppose this ill-conceived proposal.
Why are veterinary groups opposed?
The statements issued by ABVP, AAHA, and SAVMA echo concerns voiced across veterinary medicine, including by the AVMA and other veterinary groups. Consistently, these organizations recognize the risks of having nonveterinarians perform tasks like diagnosing, treating, prescribing, and even performing surgery—tasks that require a veterinarian’s unique and thorough training and skills.
Creating a midlevel practitioner position in veterinary medicine would endanger animal health and safety, public health, our food supply, and client trust.
AAHA, for example, warned in its statement that "inadequate training and education" for the position "poses concern for significant risks to patients regarding safety and quality of medicine and surgery." AAHA also noted the lack of "established licensing or testing to evaluate the graduate’s readiness for practice."
The ABVP expressed concern that creating a midlevel position could “compromise the quality of veterinary medical practice, animal welfare, and public health.” Instead, the group called for “redirection of MLP-focused resources toward strengthening and expanding education of fully trained veterinarians and veterinary technicians.”
The SAVMA Executive Board cited the AVMA’s webpage about the proposed midlevel position and expressed “full support of the AVMA’s position.” In an interview, SAVMA President Tara Barron said: “We want our students to have a future in veterinary medicine that is innovative…, but in the interest of our name and profession, we believe this is not the best path for the future of veterinary medicine.”
Individual veterinarians and veterinary technicians agree
Numerous other veterinary organizations also have declared opposition to a proposed midlevel practitioner. (View the list here.)
Wherever we live, we can help raise awareness of this threat.
They’re joined by a growing chorus of individual veterinarians and veterinary technicians who have written and published opinion pieces on the topic, many of them in Colorado where the November ballot includes a binding referendum to create a midlevel position called “veterinary professional associate."
Veterinary professionals know that creating a midlevel practitioner position in veterinary medicine would endanger animal health and safety, public health, our food supply, and client trust.
Wherever we live, we can help raise awareness of this threat—by sharing messages to let friends, family members, colleagues and acquaintances in Colorado know why it’s a bad idea. Follow the Colorado group Keep Our Pets Safe and the AVMA on Facebook and other social media, and reshare information about the dangers of a midlevel veterinary position.
Comments
Midlevel veterinary assistants
I vote no, bad idea. It would erode trust in the veterinary profession.
mid level practitioners
what happened to practice in veterinary medicine without a veterinary license. I am totally opposed to this and I'm very glad that I'm within 10 years of retirement because this will be a major disgrace the profession I don't think client will be accepting of it either. Maybe once or twice but when they have an animal die, I think there's gonna be a lot of issues.
No to mid level practitioners
I would much rather see efforts made towards attracting people to veterinary technician training! That’s where we need help.
Mid level veterinarian
I do not want veterinary medicine to lower its standards for its clients. We already have much more knowledge than general physicians. Expecting a veterinary doctor assistant to absorb the knowledge required to do what is being suggested is wrong. They might as well be veterinarians. I disagree with this initiative.
Add New Comment