I've been thinking a lot about the advanced practice stuff lately. Mainly because I'm not sure why I have a problem with it. Because, in essence, I don't have an issue with it. In essence, I think it's a great tool for self reflection. To force yourself to go deeper than self claims and provide evidence of outcomes, that's a great thing for anyone to do. That's what I enjoy about applying for jobs. Whether I get the job or not (recently it's been more of the latter) the experience of compiling my evidence examples and reflecting on my resume has been a valuable process.
So what's my issue? Is it that I'm so cynical that I immediately assume the process is corrupt? Possibly. I need to work on that.
So what's my issue? My husband pursues credentials in his field and I have no issue with it at all. It's a great way to help him focus and challenge himself professionally.
So what's my issue? I think what riled me up about this was when I read this comment from the PSA: "Advancing practice provides pharmacists with a step-by-step pathway to continuously grow". You see, the way I look at it is that the challenge is what makes it worth pursuing. The harder the better in some ways. This is my ego kicking in I guess. Theodore Roosevelt said "comparison is the thief of joy" and I think he was right. Other people's motivations are their own business, I should just focus on my own.
So is that really my issue? I think what it comes down to is that I don't know where I would fit into the process and that makes me uncomfortable. I don't have a standard job description. My practice profile probably looks all over the place to an outsider. But maybe that's the challenge for me. The evidence of whether or not you are able to skillfully craft an argument lays in the hands of the reader, afterall.