[Histonet] uncertified techs

Thomas Jasper tjasper <@t> copc.net
Wed Feb 11 14:17:47 CST 2009


You never needed to pay the $45 a year to the ASCP.  Once you were certified, you were certified.  No one can take that away from you. And $45 for a sticker wasn't insurance of anything.  That money went to supporting the ASCP and getting you a copy of their magazine.  I realize it's different today for new certificants with the CE requirement, which is actually not a bad idea.

To everyone else interested in this discussion,

I fall on the side of ASCP certification being the unifying factor.  And I've still not been convinced that state licensure (or whatever kind of licensure) is necessary.  We have a national standard with the ASCP-BOR, I see no need to re-invent the wheel here.  And I realize I'm probably treading ground somewhere here between the advocates for licensure and those who feel uncertified techs are good enough and if you have more training, education, etc., that's nice but not required.

Seems to me that whatever the field of endeavor, you will always find people doing exceptional work and people without a clue.  To paraphrase George Carlin, "Somewhere out there is the world's worst doctor, that's bad enough, but what's worse is that someone probably has an appointment to see him today!"  So, this may or may not have anything to do with degrees, certifications, licenses or special training.  I think the general public would like to believe it does, or why would people bother to frame all their diplomas, certificates etc., and put them on the walls of their offices?  It does seem logical that someone with more training, education and all would be a better tech.  The reality is sometimes that's true and sometimes it's not.  I like the idea of a well educated and technically skill person working in my lab, but everyone brings something different to the table.  Also, from what's been posted already it's obvious to me that life circumstances have dictated how things shook out for most people.  Everyone wants respect no matter which path brought them to the lab.  I think we can agree on 2 things here which are both less than optimal - 1)Having a technically skilled person that's good at embedding, cutting and staining, but doesn't have a clue about chemistry, biology or much in the way of science -that's a problem! 2)Having a certified, bona fide, glorified (and possibly funk-defied)degree holding, so called, well educated person that can't walk and chew gum, let alone get any lab work done -that's a problem!  I don't have the answer, but I do know that having the state hit you up every year for $$??, just to keep a license seems wrong!

In the last year, I've hired 3 well educated techs, that will eventually take their registry exam.  I appreciate the education they've got.  The level of technical expertise I get from them is good to very good as well.  So, I'm lucky in that regard.  I do believe it was a mistake to eliminate the practical portion of the exam.  I can elaborate on that with anyone who disagrees if they wish, but this post is probably long enough for now.  Also, I'm sure this discussion can seem confusing and odd to our UK, etc., colleagues, but their social medicine makes for a completely different beast.

Thanks for allowing me to ramble.

Tom Jasper

Thomas Jasper HT (ASCP) BAS
Histology Supervisor
Central Oregon Regional Pathology Services
Bend, OR 97701
tjasper <@t> copc.net

-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu [mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Steven Coakley
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 9:47 AM
To: Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] uncertified techs

Thanks for all the input.  So why am I wasting my cash paying the $45 for an ascp sticker?
15 years ago I suppose I should have taken the extra time to become at least an MLT.
Oh well.
Thanks again ya all.  :)

Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu

More information about the Histonet mailing list