Now that we have an authentic D.O. posting here, I can ask a question that has intrigued me for years. Quite a few years ago, the people of California, in all their wisdom, voted for a state proposition that, as I understood it, automatically converted all existing D.O.'s into M.D.'s, whether they wanted to or not. Is this still the case? I have wondered how the D.O. world regarded this curious move, which seemed at the time to me like asking people to vote on whether or not rabbits laid eggs.
During the period from 1890 to the present, the only two California ballot propositions having anything to do with the regulation of osteopaths were: November 7, 1922; Proposition 20, Osteopathic Act. Initiative; Creates Board of Osteopathic Examiners appointed by Governor; prescribes powers and duties thereof; authorizes said board in respect to graduates of osteopathic schools to carry out provisions of Medical Practice Act of 1913, and acts amendatory thereof, and issue to them any form of certificate authorized thereunder; confers upon said board all functions relating to such graduates heretofore exercised by State Board of Medical Examiners; creates contingent fund from receipts under act, requiring compensation of members of board, and of persons appointed thereby, and all expenses incurred under act, to be paid only therefrom. Passed. Citation: Stats. 1923, pg. xciii November 6, 1962; Proposition 22, Osteopaths. Initiative act amendment; Continues Board of Osteopathic Examiners with power to enforce certain provisions of the Medical Practice Act as to osteopaths. Provides that qualified osteopaths who elect to designate themselves "M.D." will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Board of Medical Examiners. Grants Legislature power to amend the Osteopathic Initiative Act of 1922 and repeal that act and transfer functions to Board of Medical Examiners when there are 40 or less licensed osteopaths. Passed. Citation: Stats. 1962, 1st Ex. Sess. ch. 48. There were other ballot propositions between 1890 and the present which contained the word "osteopath" or "osteopathy," but they dealt with such things as poison control regulations, or science educational prerequisites, where osteopathy was simply listed alongside other medical specialties and, therefore, had nothing to do with the actual regulation of osteopaths. In the 1962 proposition, it looks voluntary; and, further, it looks like it would only be involuntary if the number of licensed osteopaths in the state ever fell below 40, and the legislature chose to take action. See also Osteopathic Physicians & Surgeons v. Cal. Medical Assn. (1964) 224 CA2d 378. See also D'Amico v. Board Of Medical Examiners (1970) 6 CA3d 716. See also Board of Osteopathic Examiners v. Board of Medical Examiners (1975) 53 CA3d 78. See also The Osteopathic Medical Board of California. See also The Medical Board of California. Hope that helps!
And, as I understand it, few D.O.s took the M.D. option. Here in New Mexico, we have separate licensing boards and acts and the requirements for a D.O. are slightly less onerous, IIRC. Very slightly.
I think it is great that Dr. Greg has really taken the time to explain what a DO was. For a long time, my primary care physician was a DO and for the life of me, I never knew any difference between the two.
John, years ago – probably a couple of decades at least – I worked with a fellow who had the opportunity to do so and this is the story as best as I can recall. One of the UC medical schools took over a proprietary osteopathic school and gave alumni the opportunity of converting to MD. He didn’t; he said was a resident at the time and he couldn’t afford the fee.
Thanks, CalDog, for the information. I suppose $65 was a great deal of money for a medical resident in '62. I remember it was a fortune for a high school kid who pumped gas and fixed flats for a buck fifteen an hour.
