Well, last month I talked about how I was glad I took the boards. And I still am. However, since then, a Newsweek article came out trying to make sense of the American Board of Internal Medicine’s financial history, and it’s not good.
While this does not necessarily reflect on the two association I took my boards with (the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology and the American Board of Addiction Medicine), the report has definitely made me think twice about the recertification process and the complexities of holding these organizations accountable to the physicians and the public that they serve.
There is a new grassroots organization, called the National Board of Physicians and Surgeons, and it has cropped up as an alternative method of maintaining certification for various specialties in medicine. They are going about this by addressing two major complaints that physicians have about the current board recertification process, which are money and the relevance of the exam itself.
Personally I think that the development of competition in the free market can only be a good thing; and I am very much anticipating the development of this alternative source of recertification. I am also very glad to see physicians taking a stand for themselves, as often times when new changes and new regulations occur, we complain but do not take any action. I am trying to do my part by openly admitting that I made a mistake in writing my last post–while I still believe the initial certification is important and worthwhile, I believe I spoke too broadly in stating that recertification in and of itself is also worthwhile, without examining the current process more closely. I hope others take a stand too, because only together can we effect future change.