Skip to main content
The authors bring up the interesting question “who is a doctor?”
Descriptively, the answer depends on jurisdiction. In several European nations such as Germany and Poland a doctor is a holder of an academic doctorate. Graduates of undergraduate medical education are called “physicians”―in case of latter only after full registration having passed an examination and completed an internship―and not “doctors”. Many do complete a doctorate in medicine or medical sciences and for this reason alongside historic association of medical practitioners with these degrees recently graduated physicians may be addressed as doctors however are discouraged from addressing themselves as such by legislation.
But keeping the above in mind the answer to the question “who is a physician?” also depends on jurisdiction. Given the historical difference between practitioners of medicine, there are those where a “physician” is a specialist in medicine or at least one who is a member of a college of physicians; this is meant to make clear the distinction between such persons as opposed to surgeons, psychiatrists, general practitioners or junior medical practitioners working in any field including junior medical trainees who have not gained admission to a college of physicians. All of these are known simply as “doctors”. In other systems they are all physicians, as despite history all medical practitioners including surgeons study medicine.
Interestingly, even the question of “who is a professor?” depends on context. In the United Kingdom, Poland, and Germany the holder of an academic chair is a professor. In the first they may also be an emertius one such a chair. In the latter only if they have been awarded the academic degree of Professor (and holders of such as always professors regardless of academic position. Given that in Canada as well as the United States there are full professors who do not hold either the aforementioned degree or even an academic doctorate but rather professional degrees in medicine, there is the humorous scenario where while presenting research findings in Berlin or Szczecin one may be, at the same time, a professor but not a doctor.
Australia has attempted to provide some clarity to the public in distinguishing between academic doctors and medical practioners by restricting this latter term in legislature. But ensuring clarity in a public exposed to globalized popular culture may be difficult. Even ensuring clarity amongst an educated class of academics when exposed to different contexts in conferences through conferences and literature might be difficult. Such clarity in English speaking audiences might require agreements between various parties in at the very least Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and potentially also India. All of these might be accustomed to their own traditions.
In normative terms, “who should be called a doctor”, even limiting ourselves to the premise that current usage should reflect historical usage of the Latin word, may depend on knowing more above this context. Going back to the so called Medieval Universities, was the term “doctor” used referring serving faculty with doctoral degrees? Is so it could be argued neither the medical practioner in the United Kingdom with only an undergraduate degree in medicine nor the Doctor of Philosophy degree holder working in industry without academic appointment should be called doctors. We might wish to look even further back in time to when Latin “dooer” became “doctor”. If at this time a “doctor” is one who conducts “dooer” then the faculty of an elementary school might be called “doctors” but not so the academic doctorate holder working in industry or clinical medicine. However if the term “doctor” at this time reflects the status of a learned person who “teaches” whether undergraduates by giving lectures, graduates by supervising study, the academic world & public at large by publishing research, or their patients by providing medical advice, both might be “doctors”. Maybe, just maybe, we might decide that despite historical usage, this is the one we might wish to adopt now. There may be an argument that a pharmacist holding a PharmD holder educates whether by providing information to patients in the community pharmacy, assisting medical practioners select medications in the hospital, or publishing in the literature. The approaches might be different in the same way as they are different for an academic depending on whether they address undergraduate audiences, peers, or the general public. However all cases require making use of achieved academic learning. Whether this learning is remotely equable between the PharmD and PhD holder is not for myself, a very junior medical practitioner, to say.