Articles lately in Veterinary Team Brief, coupled with the NAVTA
Veterinary Nurse Initiative, have nudged me into writing about this seemingly hot-button and controversial topic. I honestly don't see why this topic should be so controversial or tender, because it seems pretty cut and dried to me.
A veterinarian is a licensed professional who has a minimum of a DVM degree, who take a national exam (NAVLE), and obtain licensure in their state of practice. They are required to stay up to date with Continuing Education throughout the year, and are required a minimum number of CE hours to keep their license and remain abreast of new developments in medicine. They are held accountable by state and federal boards and agencies, including the DEA, as they are medical professionals that compare to MDs in the human field.
A Veterinary Technician is a licensed, registered, or certified professional who has a minimum of an AAS in Veterinary technology, has passed a national exam (VTNE), and has registered or is licensed in the state of which they reside or practice. They are required to stay up to date with Continuing Education throughout the year, and are required a minimum number of CE hours to keep their license and remain abreast of new developments in medicine, just like DVMs. In licensing states, there are laws regulating what licensed VTs can do, and what non-credentialed veterinary staff (assistants, receptionists) cannot do. The closest human medicine counterpart would be the RN, though Vet Techs have a little more freedom, legally, with patients.
A veterinary assistant is a non-licensed professional who is either 'off the street' or has gone through a certificate program that covers the basics of veterinary assisting - restraint, basic anatomy, basic overview of medications, etc. that provides an excellent basis of knowledge for assisting the veterinarian and technician in day to day functions. A veterinary assistant is not required to stay up to date with Continuing Education at this time, nor are they held to any state or national standard. The closest thing in human medicine would be anywhere from a candy striper to a CNA, depending on the certificate status of the assistant.
(Ideally, in my opinion, all assistants would have gone through the certification program, but at this time it has not been deemed necessary by the powers-that-be. Hopefully sooner rather than later, however, since all aspects of veterinary medicine should be as regulated as human medication. But this is just my opinion)
Now. Here's the kick in the balls that I keep seeing everywhere, on every veterinary forum that I plan to break down for y'all.
Those who call themselves vet techs who are not credentialed, no matter how many years they have been in the field, think that they are exactly the same and frequently say they are worth more than a credentialed veterinary technician.
Let that sink in a minute.
People who do not hold a license to practice medicine, who choose to practice medicine anyway, vociferously announce that they are equivalent, more knowledgeable, and more skilled than those who have spent time, money, and energy on the legal ability and responsibility to practice medicine.
Up until 2012, non-credentialed veterinary assistants/staff could sit for the VTNE in order to grandfather into the credentialed Vet Tech family. This was intended to show the non-credentialed staff that their experience and knowledge is valuable, and these people had to study their asses off in order to pass the VTNE. They had to take the initiative and read books, take practice tests, learn things they never would have thought they needed to know. There was not one single non-credentialed vet professional that I can find that took the VTNE and passed without studying and broadening their horizons.
(This means, in layman's terms, that y'all had the chance to prove yourselves worthy of the exam, and if you didn't take it, you can't complain. You knew this was coming. And for those who weren't in the field back then, all you've ever known is this requirement for Vet Techs and so there's no use in complaining that it isn't fair, because it's always been this way and you can still go to school.)
This means that, in order to pass a national test and become credentialed, even 30+ years of experience is not enough to become accredited as a Veterinary Technician. This alone may show that experience is not enough to use the title Vet Tech. However, those who say that a degree and license isn't necessary to call yourself a Vet Tech would disagree. And so there is more.
Here are the arguments I have seen from non-credentialed veterinary staff:
1. "I've worked X Number of Years and I would outshine any credentialed tech fresh out of school!"
This one makes me laugh to keep from crying. Really? Your X# of years of experience means you can do better than someone with zero experience? YOU DON'T SAY?!? Wow. You must be SO good at your job that you could take someone with no experience and do better than them.
Seriously. I saw it no fewer than 6 times in an hour on the Veterinary Team Brief post....do people actually think this is a valid argument?
2. "Getting your degree is a waste of money."
This one always hurts. I do not feel it was a waste of money. Why? Because I learned the AVMA standard of care. I learned more in 18 months (2 years for those who didn't test out of classes) than I could have learned in 10 years of practice experience. Know why? Because the school teaches everyone the same stuff that licensed vets and techs need to know. School teaches the standard of care, which is higher than most General Practice DVMs require, but need to. Experience won't teach you the reasons we monitor six parameters in anesthesia, or how gas exchange works. Experience won't teach you not to give certain meds without a filter needle unless there are fatal consequences. Experience won't teach you how to know when it's been too long since your patient urinated....until it's too late for the patient. Experience won't teach you why phenobarbital is contraindicated in patients with liver disease, why you don't give Diazepam subcutaneously or leave it in a syringe for more than 30 minutes.....experience doesn't teach you the hows AND the whys. But school does.
Experience is based entirely on who you have worked for/with. It has absolutely NO bearing on whether or not you are following the AVMA standard of care, or even practicing good medicine. If someone teaches you how to do something, and it's wrong/outdated, how would you know? You wouldn't, unless you worked with someone who is credentialed, knows their stuff, and is willing to teach.
3. "Not all credentialed techs are good at their job."No, they aren't. And not all hairdressers are, either. And not all RNs, EMTs, etc. As with any job and education, you get out of it what you put into it. You don't get to float along on your credentials forever. Focusing only on the negative is a good way to be ignored due to the vast majority of credentialed techs being awesome at their jobs, and working around people who don't always know what they're doing. Not only that, but we have to wade through a lot of people who refuse to acknowledge that being a credentialed tech is a worthy career, who dilute the field with ignorance and low pay. Being a credentialed tech is HARD, which is why a lot of people don't do it.
4. "I know a ton of non-credentialed techs who are amazing at what they do."Awesome. I do as well! Most of my professional friends are non-credentialed, and I love them. Heck, I taught them all something at some point because I am a firm believer in everyone being edumacated - and they've shown me stuff, too! It isn't education OR experience....it's a combination of both. You cannot have education alone, nor can you have experience alone. Well, you can, but you won't get far. At least with education, you're starting out far ahead of those who don't have education. And you can always gain experience just like everyone else.
My biggest concern with non-credentialed veterinary professionals calling themselves vet techs is that it cheapens the title, and cheapens what we do.....and it's DANGEROUS. Maybe not as much with those specific people who have lots of experience, but if we lump all the non-credentialed people together who call themselves techs......I shudder to think how many deaths could be prevented. I can guarantee that animals have died because of those who refuse to admit that an education should be required for any medical professional.
If someone who has been in the field either just a day or 16 years calls themselves a vet tech, it dilutes the field into a bunch of candy stripers who want the title. They want to be considered as badass as the licensed vet tech who spent the time, energy, and money to become the most knowledgeable at what they do, and be a patient advocate.
If a non-credentialed professional wants to be called a vet tech, they can go to school, get their degree, and take the national exam. BOOM. Instant vet tech. If they're as good as they seem to be or say they are, school will be a breeze and they'll ace all their classes. Except they won't, because they're just a badass in whatever practice they've been in, and they will have to learn the national/global standards of care. It's scary, and it will be difficult. So they choose to abuse the title Vet Tech instead, and kvetch that it isn't fair that they can't use it.
|
http://belrea.edu/blog/vet-vet-tech-or-assistant/ |
The bottom line here is that, if you actually value Veterinary Technicians, if you value the pets that come to the clinic/hospital for care, and if you value patient care over all else (including your ego), you would promote all Vet Techs going to school and requiring a degree and license to practice.
Put your own feelings towards what you've accomplished aside. I don't give a heck if you've been in the field 3, 5, 10, 20 years. Look at it from the perspective of the owner and the pet. Do you want your kids or yourself to be assessed and triaged by a kid off the street, or do you want your furbaby....your child.....yourself....to be in the arms of a licensed professional who is legally bound to stringent standards?
Veterinary Medicine is moving towards an excellent goal - to have credentialed Vet Techs. And NAVTA is once again striving to change our title to Veterinary Nurse. I approve this change, and I approve the use of the term veterinary assistant for anyone who is not a credentialed Vet Tech/Nurse. Because gosh darn it, I did my time in school, I am still paying my dues, I am abiding by the Vet Tech Oath and the NAVTA Code of Ethics. I hold myself to a higher standard, and I hold my peers to the same standard. Without striving for excellence, there is no reason to be a Vet Tech. And refusing to acknowledge excellence, credentials, and standards for Vet Techs, we all lose.
There is nothing wrong with being a veterinary assistant. Nothing. So please stop saying you're a vet tech and you're just as good. This cheapens it for everyone, for the sake of your pride. Stop it.
About me:
I graduated from Bel-Rea in December 2001, have been a credentialed Vet Tech since January 2002, and began working in a veterinary facility in August 2001. I taught Veterinary Technology for 18 months from early 2009 - mid 2010. I have 1 year GP experience (fresh outta school), 2 years Internal Medicine experience, and 12 years Emergency and Critical Care experience with an emphasis in anesthesia. My goal is to one day hold my VTS (ECC) and maybe more. If I go a shift without learning something, it is a day wasted. If I go a shift without teaching someone something, it is a day wasted.