Things to know about Optometry (1 Viewer)

[LuBu]

last time i looked it up it was about 100k-150k

That's utter nonsense. You will, however, struggle to reach the magical 6-digit income in this profession in spite of many years of experience.

Having seen all kinds of half-truths and utter nonsense being bandied about regarding Optometry, I would like to set the record straight. It is simply not good to be misled on potentially life-changing decisions. How do you know that I am not talking out of my proverbial? It is because Optometry was one of my possible career options and I researched that damn thing like hell and I mean it. I was offered a place to study Optometry, but with the knowledge I had on the profession, I had to reject the offer.

Things to carefully consider before doing Optometry:

- Although it is reported that Optometry graduate income is among the highest, you will meet your wage ceiling at about $70k on average, in 2-3 years as a salaried professional. Need proof, look at the ads at the OAA site and easily extrapolate a professional salary structure yourself.

- While there is a modest* clinical aspect to the job, it is by and large, still a strongly retail endeavour. Meaning, your employer will expect you to hard-sell branded spectacle-frames and coloured contact lenses whenever you can.

- Whether you are a salaried optom. or an owner, you will need volume to obtain a decent income in this profession. But have you seen the traffic to most optometry shops? It is a trickle compared to a regular pharmacy and spectacle frames are not controlled items like drugs, so, mark-ups are low and competition is increasingly high, esp from boutique spec shops and Myer. Like it or not, almost all of an optometrist's income, is derived from selling spectacle frames and contact lenses, not providing eye-treatments.

- If Optometry is that bad, why is it hard to get in? That's because of relatively low demand in the community, thus, little government funding for places for the miserly 3 optom schools. If places and schools are increased to the level of say, pharmacy (over 12 schools and growing), the ENTER 99 requirement will drop by a huge margin, possibly much lower than Pharmacy which hovers at between 93-97+.

- Lets get real, optometry IS NOT medicine. The eye doctors vehemently HATE optometrists because of a perceived turf encroachment (read its history at the OAA site) and in each fight, you can guess who loses. Witness the recent fiasco in Queensland over the struggle for optometrists to attain rights to prescribe drugs. With the eye doctors winning the state government ears through resignation threats, Queensland optometrists will not be prescribing drugs or expanding their professional role in the foreseeable future. Don't do Optometry for the possibility of learning/doing quasi-medicine.

- Optometry is NOT recognised as a legitimate health field in several developed countries, including Singapore (a 3-year Diploma course after Year 10 to qualify) and Hong Kong. They are also paid less than nurses in those countries. Hence, job prestige is certainly not applicable in those countries.

- For States where Optometrists can prescribe drugs for minor eye problems, realise that the prescriptions are not PBS subsidised. Meaning, patients pay the full price for drugs, and we all know what that causes. - Less visits to optometrists for eye problems thus, mooting the much hyped increased clinical roles of the optometrist.

- 5 years of study?? What the heck is that all about? Come on, what do these Schools think they are producing? Medical Doctors? Optometry is a second-tier profession in the health-field hierarchy. Optometry does NOT have surgery of any sort like dental training. Thus, Optometry is approaching overtraining for a limited job scope and whose forays into the eye-doc's territory have been very ignoble due to the invincible medical lobbying. Refracting, the cornerstone of optometry, is also performed by computers these days. Not very challenging, at the least.

- There was an article in Australian Doctor awhile back when Peter Costello, much to the anger of the AMA, released the earnings based on tax-returns of medical professionals (optometry was included - why - I can't say). While not dead-last in terms of gross earnings (psychiatry was the lowest), Optometrists, on average, have very significant overhead costs. Consequently, they make slightly over $60k, if I recall correctly and the lowest for actual income.

- Lastly, ever heard of orthoptists? You'd better. Their roles are almost similar and in nearly all instances, overlap those of optometrists. Entry to orthoptist courses is significantly easier (LaTrobe, and another uni ~ ENTER 79-85), the training is almost identical to Optometry and the average orthoptist salary is much lesser than an optometrist's at about $30k-$40k. Eye doctors use orthoptists as a strategic wedge between optometrists and themselves, and due to the AMA's influence, hospitals have a traditional aversion for optometrists and don't hire them. Instead, in almost every aspect of primary eye treatment, utilise orthoptists.

--

While I have done my best to present the downsides as accurately as possible, this list is not complete by any means. However, I can safely say that everything I have stated in here can be backed up with legitimate online and published material as well as anecdotal reports.


For most of you, try UMAT or GAMSAT again. Or lobby for a change for entry to medical schools. Or just do Pharmacy. It is more flexible than a specialist profession like Optometry and probably has more prospects.

 

[micelite]

^ That's a rather skewed argument for a thread that set out to "carefully consider" whether or not to do optometry as the course to do in uni. With your sort of logic, and I can coax you into believing that driving on the Hume Highway is life-threatening.
Of course, all careers will have their own pros and cons, but you seems to go on and on about the cons of optometry.
Read this extract from www.optom.unsw.edu.au
"Q. What are the job prospects?
A. Currently, employment opportunities are excellent, with all optometry graduates securing employment (often before they have completed their degree). While positions in Sydney may be lesser in number, the demand in the country areas and interstate is quite high. With the age of the Australian population increasing. It is envisaged that demand will remain strong for optometrists in the future."

Optometry was never medicine...those who considered doing optom will know that they aren't even run by the same faculty at UNSW. I can't help but think that you are some cocky snob who considered doing optometry in hope for some prestigious "turf". That is precisely what the UMAT is for, to get rid of the egotistic attitude among medical doctors who think they are above the rest.

I mean if thats what you want, to be Dr LuBu, and be an optometrist, you can by doing further study (still lesser time spent compared to the time it take to become an "eye doctor" or opthamologist).

My optometrist (Dr William Trinh) gets along fine with opthamologists. After a patient has surgery, they are referred to him for routine checkups. This fight over who should be called "eye doctors" amazes me, it seems too unprofessional to be true. I mean it's not like they're competing for business, one examines and prescribes lenses while the other does the surgery.

As for orthoptics, what can I say?
They aren't trained like optometrists.
They can't prescribe glasses as yet (Isn't that the main point??)
If they could do what optometrists do, then why is the government still forking out tax payers' money to fund the more expensive BOptom BSc CSPs?

Yes there are 3 optom schools in Australia, which can only be a good thing for optom graduates, particularly if they're willing to move to states which don't have optom graduates.

If you're planning on doing pharmacy, good luck mate, I'll see you in a few years working in Woolworths... much like a checkout chick.

 

[LuBu]

Dear micelite,
Considering the numerous substantiated points I have brought up in my post re the downsides of Optometry, it seems that the very best a troll like yourself does is to counter my post with 1) one uni website 2) an anecdotal report going against established trends 3) your rather uneducated gut feeling/personal opinion. Are you from Mars? Wait, it looks like you are browsing from further out - Pluto - and I heard awesome things about Plutonian Optometry. Stop being in denial. That is just pathetic.

^ That's a rather skewed argument for a thread that set out to "carefully consider" whether or not to do optometry as the course to do in uni. With your sort of logic, and I can coax you into believing that driving on the Hume Highway is life-threatening.

It is only "skewed" because the "pros" of Optometry are way too exaggerated in uni-websites and here like the 6-digit income bit.

Read this extract from www.optom.unsw.edu.au <http://www.optom.unsw.edu.au>
"Q. What are the job prospects?
A. Currently, employment opportunities are excellent, with all optometry graduates securing employment (often before they have completed their degree). While positions in Sydney may be lesser in number, the demand in the country areas and interstate is quite high. With the age of the Australian population increasing. It is envisaged that demand will remain strong for optometrists in the future."

Ever heard of financial self-interest? Please show me a university site that mentions ANY downsides of a particular course that it is promoting. That said, I never claimed that (earth-based, esp. Australian) Optometrists will be out of a job or have a hard time getting one.

Optometry was never medicine...those who considered doing optom will know that they aren't even run by the same faculty at UNSW. I can't help but think that you are some cocky snob who considered doing optometry in hope for some prestigious "turf". That is precisely what the UMAT is for, to get rid of the egotistic attitude among medical doctors who think they are above the rest.

And I think that you are some arrogant and presumptious so* for thinking that. It is so sad that you don't even know what the UMAT and interviews are really for. They are for those who are less capable of achieving the magical 98-99++ ENTER scores to actually stand a chance for doing med/dent, at the expense of the harder working, higher scoring and supposedly "less socially apt" competitors.
There are many medical hopefuls with fabulous grades who appear hard done by the mandatory subjective tests required for entry into med schools. These souls invariably end up in 3rd/4th choice courses like Optometry/Pharmacy. Certainly these high-achieving would-be med students are a credit to Optometry schools. But surely you didn't think that the ENTER score for Optometry shot up to 99 without reason? Recall that only 5 years ago, the ENTER score required for Optometry was far lower than 99 and actually lower than a number of Pharmacy courses. So why the sudden "demand" for Optometry? Did Optometry suddenly develop greater clinical roles, e.g. surgery and a higher profile in the community? No and no.

My optometrist (Dr William Trinh) gets along fine with opthamologists. After a patient has surgery, they are referred to him for routine checkups. This fight over who should be called "eye doctors" amazes me, it seems too unprofessional to be true. I mean it's not like they're competing for business, one examines and prescribes lenses while the other does the surgery.

Dr William Trinh? Unless you are in the US or have a PhD, Optometrists here don't get to use Dr title. Just because the turf-war seems too unprofessional to be true does not mean that it is not. Do your own research. Let me help you - check optomsqld.com. Ever read the OAA site? Check out the Optometrists' colourful and dysfunctional history with Ophthalmologists before you type another ignorant post on this issue.

They can't prescribe glasses as yet (Isn't that the main point??)

Keyword here is yet. It will only be a matter of time.

If they could do what optometrists do, then why is the government still forking out tax payers' money to fund the more expensive BOptom BSc CSPs?

They (the Fed Gov) will get smart eventually. And with the eye-docs at helm, they will be soon enough. There have been published position papers on this issue by the Orthoptists Association and the Optometrists are getting jittery. The trouble is, the OAA does not even have the political clout of the Pharmacy Guild. With regards to Optometry CSPs, I have been told that they are slowly reduced, if that does not reflect (lack of) demand as perceived by the gov, don't know what will.

In UK, Optometry training is only 3 years + intern year. I don't see how overtraining Aussie Optometrists will help them in their fight for eye-doc turf or gain them any further professional legitimacy. 5 years?! Come on. So where's the surgery component ala dentistry? Unless Optometrists are permitted to do the rather profitable Lasik ops and other forms of eye-surgery, 5 years is overtraining for a quasi-clinical-cum-retail practitioner.

If you're planning on doing pharmacy, good luck mate, I'll see you in a few years working in Woolworths... much like a checkout chick.

Do you know this for sure?


Your spirited defense of Optometry without validity or qualification makes me wonder if you are an ivory-towered Optometry academic.

 

[micelite]

Ever heard of selective reading?
I can't believe how selfish you are as to mislead people by saying that you've done your homework and researched thoroughly. And no, I'm not in denial... I'm looking forward to starting uni.

What I can say is that you are reading these articles out of context (think about it... why would optomsqld.com or the OPTOMETRISTS ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA
Queensland & Northern Territory put down its own profession).
Okay, the opthamologists have had a grudge against optometrists for a very long time. Orthoptists too have been around for a long time too. Meanwhile optometrists still practice... it's higly unlikely that optometrists would be blown away by almighty eye doctors and be replaced by orthoptists as you paint it.

Many things have changed since the early 1900s. The profession did seem likely to die back in 1952, but "After 23 years, optometrists' patients were on equal standing with those of ophthalmologists. The profession once again began to thrive." Here's more that you didn't consider from optomsqld.com:

"Since those heady days of 1975 optometry has consolidated its standing in the community. In 1977 veterans, considered an at-risk group, were allowed to consult with optometrists for the first time. Restrictions on use of ophthalmic drugs by optometrists have gradually been relaxed. Progressively all sorts of authorities are recognising the professional standing and expertise of optometrists and are approaching optometry when advice on vision care is required.

In 1993, the AOA and its members were able to overturn a Government decision to remove Medicare benefits for most optometric consultations. This campaign showed the great public acceptance of optometry, which is also reflected by the fact that two-thirds of primary eye care consultations are provided by optometrists."

Do these appear as blurs to you. It's a condition known as selective reading... you should go get it checked by your optometrist. While your there, tell him about your "research" and see how flamed you'll get.

Back to this hatred between eye docs and optometrists, why would eye docs open OPSM to tick the optometrists off:
"Organised ophthalmology attempted to restrict the progress of the optometric profession in a variety of ways and in the 1930's ophthalmologists established OPSM. This had the desired effect of reducing the number of ophthalmologists' prescriptions dispensed by optometrists. In turn OPSM allowed ophthalmologists to maintain an interest in dispensing from a suitable distance. OPSM's advertising and shop fronts made it possible for ophthalmologists to recruit patients."

...and have optometrists working in OPSMs?
from http://www.opsm.com/aboutopsm.html?ID=457956
"OPSM associated Optometrists provide full eye examinations and our qualified Optical Dispensers and Fashion Consultants are known for their friendly service and for helping customers who are purchasing glasses for the first time."

The OAA site you are referring to... do you mean http://www.orthoptics.org.au/ ?

"Financial self-interest"... hall-marks of a selfish, money-thirsty doctor-wannabe. The UMAT is there to screen off people like you, especially people who believe that cockiness, snobbishness, and being socially inept are separate entities.

Why is it so hard to get in?
Well like any other course it's all about the supply of places and the demand, like you say, but not because of the low demand in Australia (unless you can find evidence to suggest otherwise). I am sure that you too received a letter from the Dean of Optom school, about why the cutoff might rise beyond 99.5, and that they ultimately plan to have the some number of graduates by having vision science people transferring to second year.

The suggestion that you won't have much prestige (there's that word) in Hong Kong or what not, is completely irrelevant to the majority of optometry graduates in Australia. The vast majority of graduates stay in Australia.

Even if the drugs optometrists aren't PBS, if you had a serious eye disease that could affect XYZ, would you put off buying medicines to fixed your problem. On my part, I would hope that you would buy those medicines. Have faith in the people who decided to restructure the optom degree... I don't think they considered it lightly, neither has the government (I haven't heard the eye docs complaining about it to them).

Have you been to this site?
http://www.optometrists.asn.au/optometry/optominaust
There is an abundance of information
For example: "Optometrists may proceed to higher degrees (MSc, MOptom, PhD) at each of the schools of optometry."

Speaking of UK, did you know that supermarkets there can now have instore pharmacies?
Just a hint of what's to come. If you are doing pharmacy... I sincerely hope that you've done your research on that too.

 

[Estel]

And the moral is...
be an opthalmologist...

LuBu, did you get the UAI required for optometry?

 

[menty]

are u doing BOptom micelite?

 

[KFunk]

Speaking of UK, did you know that supermarkets there can now have instore pharmacies?
Just a hint of what's to come. If you are doing pharmacy... I sincerely hope that you've done your research on that too.

They also have those in walmarts in the USA now.

 

[Rekkusu]

Lol, though seriously, alot more people head to pharmacies rather than Optom shops. Goodness, I definitely hope that Woolies and other similar supermarkets aren't allowed to have pharmacies operating inside their shop. I mean, it's rather amusing to see cigarettes sold at the counter, then on the other side antibiotics used to save smokers...

 

[LuBu]

Ever heard of selective reading?
...
...
And no, I'm not in denial... I'm looking forward to starting uni.

It is you who is suffering from "selective" reading. In fact, I think you are also suffering from chronic denialitis and exaggerated self-worthitis.

(think about it... why would optomsqld.com or the OPTOMETRISTS ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA Queensland & Northern Territory put down its own profession).

Where is this coming from? Who ever said or alluded to anything about optometrists or their association putting down the optometric profession??

The optometrists are only defending their turf and hoping to expand their professional roles (drug prescribing rights and PBS), much to chagrin of the eye-docs who are lobbying against them. Remember, it was you who off-handedly claimed that these bickerings appeared "unprofessional" and therefore, "could not be true". Well kid, inter-professional rivalry occur all the time when there is an overlap in professional roles - it is called, looking out for your interests and livelihood. Take it from someone who has been in the working world for quite some time now - turf wars are not uncommon and occur in many other industries too, so there is nothing inherently "unprofessional" about it as it stands, you naive little urchin you.

Back to this hatred between eye docs and optometrists, why would eye docs open OPSM to tick the optometrists off:
"Organised ophthalmology attempted to restrict the progress of the optometric profession in a variety of ways and in the 1930's ophthalmologists established OPSM. This had the desired effect of reducing the number of ophthalmologists' prescriptions dispensed by optometrists. In turn OPSM allowed ophthalmologists to maintain an interest in dispensing from a suitable distance. OPSM's advertising and shop fronts made it possible for ophthalmologists to recruit patients."
...and have optometrists working in OPSMs?

I suggest that you reread the entire article, several times over if necessary, to realise the undercurrent of strong medical resentment at nearly every forward development in Optometry's short history. If the blatant and persistent attempts by the eye-docs to "restrict the progress of optometry" is not a sign of antagonism and bitter rivalry with optometry, what is? The reason optometrists now work in OPSM is because it is illegal for the eye-docs to "poach" patients off the street as they are not primary care providers.

Your lack of comprehension skills is frightening. I see that you will be a fine addition to the optometry profession as a secret weapon. If all else fails in a bid to wrest more clinical roles from the eye docs, the profession should consider using you as a weapon of mass disruption to trim the eye-doc numbers by driving them stark raving mad with your incessant and delusional drivel.

Even if the drugs optometrists aren't PBS, if you had a serious eye disease that could affect XYZ, would you put off buying medicines to fixed your problem. On my part, I would hope that you would buy those medicines. Have faith in the people who decided to restructure the optom degree... I don't think they considered it lightly, neither has the government (I haven't heard the eye docs complaining about it to them).

If someone has a serious eye-disease (e.g. causing blindness), the destination would be the eye-doc - believe me, that is the way things typically work here in Australia. The only advantage of an optometrist is the cheaper, trivial services that they provide which will not be cost-efficient visiting an eye-doc. But for long term chronic care requiring medication, you'd bet your bottom dollar that eye-docs would be preferred over optometrists.

What you have or haven't heard means less than doo to me because the eye-docs HAVE long been complaining and insinuating that optometrists are NON-MEDICAL, cut-rate pseudo-doctors whose professional roles should be limited if the "public is not to suffer substandard eye care". Ever read AustralianDoctor and the AMA site? I only hope that most people who go into Optometry, do so with far more actual foreknowledge of the profession than yourself.

There is an abundance of information
For example: "Optometrists may proceed to higher degrees (MSc, MOptom, PhD) at each of the schools of optometry."

Getting a wee bit out of point, aren't we? What has this got to do with our little debate?

Your supposedly "educated" opinions completely contradict the references you provided or are irrelevant. At least, use references that SUPPORT your ludicrious stance okay?

Hate to say it but none of your referenced statements, has disputed the points I had raised regarding Optometry. As a favour (I get all warm and cozy inside when assisting the disabled), I will elucidate the major points in my original essay in the next post.

 

[LuBu]

Validated downsides to Optometry (Was: Re: Things to know about Optometry)

Once again, I crusade against the darkness of ignorance and fanaticism.

1. Optometrists are not paid a whole bunch and as salaried professionals, the awe-inspiring 6-figure incomes touted here are very rare [1].

2. Optometry is a volume driven retail job [1] with limited clinical aspects. The sale of optical devices make up most of your income/profits, not optometric services which is less than 20% [2]. It is said that pharmacists will be similar to "checkout chicks" soon, however, optometrists have always been and will always be specs and contact lens salesmen-pseudo clinicians whose overtraining in clinical and medical-sciences cannot be fully utilised due to laws.

3. Optometry can be done in only 3 years of study (diploma course in Singapore [3]) plus intern year (UK [4]) because there is a small and restricted number of conditions that optometrists may legally deal with - all non-invasive. Refracting used to be the mainstay of optometry. But as it is now largely done by computers (auto-refractors), other professions demand the right to refract just like the optometrists. Not hard to see that the optometry pie is further threatened.

4. Due to pt 3, 5 years of Optometry training is overtraining for a non-surgical (not even a minor one) practitioner. In addition, I doubt that it will provide any further credibility for optometric role expansion without a reclassification of the optoms and eye-docs' professional responsibilities to avoid serious conflict of interests and wasteful overlaps.

5. I think the 5-year course is promoted for 2 reasons - (a) the profession has to appear a grade higher and more "well-trained" than orthoptists to fight off their plans for independent spectacles prescriber status [5,6], making them almost IDENTICAL to optometrists albeit cheaper (b) the profession thinks that more training justifies greater clinical roles e.g. greater prescription rights [7,8]. However, the slightest move into medical territory will be strenously resisted as evidenced when the QLD eye-docs hobbled that move successfully by threatening to resign from public hospitals [9,10]. This professional blackmail has shown that the development of optometry and other non-medical professions with overlapping medical roles, is dependent on the whims and generosity of organised medicine. A negative precedent against Optometry throughout the States could result in the future.

6. Drugs prescribed by Optometrists are not PBS subsidised. Obviously, that would limit accessbility [8] if patients had to pay out of pocket. At present, medical doctors hold the monopoly to the PBS and are unlikely to share it with the optometrists willingly. It is really a political process and the optometrists appear to lack the clout [10] to manipulate a good outcome for themselves.

7. Optometrists are not usually employed within hospitals because of strong medical bias [11, 12]. Orthoptists, under the patronage of eye-docs fill the non-surgical/optometry-like eyecare roles there. This causes one less area of employment for the Optometrist.

8. According to a SMH news article [13], optometry courses are increasingly uptaken by East Asians (Chinese). This article also suggests that it is a prestige course like Medicine and Dentistry. That is simply untrue. Against this backdrop, it was necessary to remind non-local East Asians that optometry is not a recognised health-care profession back in most of their countries.


Conclusion: I am sorry but optometry does looks like the 90lb weakling in a school yard of 250lb++ buffed medical toughies. From my own observation, many students in Optometry and Pharmacy are med/dent rejects, hard done by the subjective selection filters (namely, UMAT and interviews). Thus, those considering Optometry have to carefully consider all the above factors, otherwise, a lifetime of professional frustration could result from entering a 3rd/4th preference course. This "learned clinical professional" is not as autonomous as frequently hyped and is constantly faced with threats from below (opticians, orthoptists) and above (eye-docs). Certainly, its professional identity is not as unique as say, dentists, doctors or even pharmacists! There is always someone out there who can do the Optometrist's job for possibly less or "better".

-----
References:
1. OAA Classifieds (Position vancant)
2. Australian Bureau of Statistics - 8553.0 - Optometry and Optical Dispensing Services, Australia, 1997-98
3. Singapore Polytechnic Diploma course in Optometry
4. City University London Optometry course
5. Orthoptic Association of Australia submission
6. Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists letter of support for orthoptists
7. UNSW Optometry FAQ (Why has the program been extended to a five year degree?)
8. OAA Position Paper: PBS Benefit Scheme
9. ABC News: Doctors Battle to Stop Optometrists Prescribing Drugs
10. OAA-QLD/NT: Therapeutics
11. OAA - Optometry in Australia (read Mode of Practice)
12. Response to Productivity Commission Issues Paper: The Health Workforce from OAA (read pg 5 under Hospital Access)
13. SMH: Asian medical takeover a myth

 

[menty]

Re: Validated downsides to Optometry (Was: Re: Things to know about Optometry)

wow. All four posts have been about your hatred of optometry. We know.

nerd

Now go to usyd and do your pharmacy course.

 

[wanton-wonton]

Re: Validated downsides to Optometry (Was: Re: Things to know about Optometry)

wow. All four posts have been about your hatred of optometry. We know.

nerd

Now go to usyd and do your pharmacy course.

Shut up, LuBu's my hero.

 

[funnybunny]

Re: Validated downsides to Optometry (Was: Re: Things to know about Optometry)

LuBu, why are you posting things that suggest optometry is shit etc. Maybe you dislike it, but keep that to yourself However i value your information about the course but don't make it seem as it is a unwise career to choose.

 

[LuBu]

Re: Validated downsides to Optometry (Was: Re: Things to know about Optometry)

LuBu, why are you posting things that suggest optometry is shit etc. Maybe you dislike it, but keep that to yourself However i value your information about the course but don't make it seem as it is a unwise career to choose.

How do I "make it seem as it is a (sic) unwise career to choose"? I have merely provided published information on Optometry's downsides. If because of that, Optometry seems like "crap" to you then maybe it really is. Emotional responses can't and won't change the facts behind those references. Also consider this, if I didn't think at one time that Optometry was worth it, I wouldn't have spent money applying to those States with Optom schools. The thing is to be open-minded enough to change one's views in the face of facts.

Once again, before passing me off as nothing but an unreasonable petty anti-optometry poster, I suggest looking at all the external references listed. Only 2 types of people deny facts - idiots and lunatics.

 

[LuBu]

Optometry - an overrated but really limited career?

To all those contemplating a career in Optometry but had listed Medicine or Dentistry as a higher preferences,

The main point I would like to drive through to you is that Optometry is overrated, not just in Australia but many others like the U.K. and the U.S. where there appear to be a significant oversupply. At its heart, Optometry is still a volume-driven, retail "profession" with very modest clinical aspects. By that I mean Optometrists seldom get to utilise much of their clinical training in diagnosing and treating real eye-diseases and injuries, at the typical high-street/shopping centre private practice - the place most would end up after graduation. Never mind, you say, I will only treat eye diseases in my practice. The reality of it is that in Australia (and probably UK and US), 80% of your gross income will be derived from the hard selling of optical applicances (frames and contact lenses). As you can see, you can't survive on treating minor eye problems alone. The bulk of the Optometrist's days will be spent on performing refraction for visual acuity, than anything else. Further, eye problems in the community are relatively few and those few tend to go see doctors, worrying that the problems may be an ocular or visual manifestation of underlying medical problems. Don't be in denial or get defensive - would you rush to an Optometrist shop if you suddenly developed a very painful eye condition or blindness? I would find the nearest medical clinic and most would.

Then, you would have to ask yourself - is working in a shop as a glorified salesman worth the long 5 years of clinical training, imparting the skills you may never or very rarely use? Is a retailing future really what you want?

If that is the case, do consider the volume of business between a Pharmacy practice and an Optometric one. I am by no means a Pharmacy aficonado but don't you think Pharmacy would be a better option in a retail business by virtue of traffic? Not only do Pharmacists utilise most of their training, their expanded scope of clinical practice like diagnosing minor health problems, appears to be widely used as a complement and even substitute to a visit to the doctor. Besides, people will always get sick and buy medication but not many will get eye problems or buy frames or contact lenses that frequently. Optometry is a specialist training that shoves you into a very narrowly defined profession role. But make no mistake, you are not a medical specialist. You are the Optometrist who hopes that the prescriptions for specs or contact lenses that you write for your patients will be filled at your practice because they are legally allowed to take them elsewhere like specs discount warehouses and internet specs shops for cheaper prices. If they do, that is 80% of your income walking out the door.

Now, on to a more intimate matter. If you had indeed chosen Medicine or Dentistry as a preference higher than Optometry and were rejected - are you willing to settle for so much less and different? After all, if a strong clinical role and patient interaction are desirable to you, why choose something like retail-reliant Optometry? Medical doctors and dentists perform true clinical roles that are unique to their professions and are true "specialists" in what they do. It would appear that everything an optometrist attempts to do in profession practice, must be sanctioned by organised ophthamology and medical general practice. Thus, their role is the "tiny somewhere" between the costlier ophthamologists and the retail-oriented dispensing opticians. And to top it all, now you have the ophthamology-backed orthoptics profession fighting a good fight to be exactly like the Optometrist in their roles. How is that for unique scope of practice? Additionally, being far cheaper professionals, cost will be on the orthoptist's side. Lastly, Optometrists have to wheel-and-deal in sales to stay in business. Is Optometry really right for you? Does Optometry inspire the innate little wheeling-dealing salesman in you?

I am writing this article as a person who was thinking of a second career and had considered doing Optometry. With a family to support, I obviously had to make a very sound decision based on future earnings, professional development and long term job satisfaction. My opinions are derived from the tens of hours of careful research, mulling over the pros and cons. At my age, I do not have the luxury of making a wrong career move. If I could provide fair advice to prevent others from making a mistake, I would be happy to do so. I absolutely did not type this piece to inflame emotions. In the vein of democracy, take my advice however you will. Just know what you are getting into. It is always nicer to look at the bright side of things but it is the negatives that you will have to tolerate to stay in any job.

 

[funnybunny]

Re: Optometry - an overrated but really limited career?

It's pretty obvious that you are suggesting that optom. is bad career to choose even though it may not be obvious to you. I will post something, but not waste my time explaining a lot, since if you can't understand even the atmosphere you are creating with your posts about this career, it is obvious that you will not be able to fully comprehend my post.

Once again, before passing me off as nothing but an unreasonable petty anti-optometry poster, I suggest looking at all the external references listed."
I suggest you look at all the other posts listed

wow. All four posts have been about your hatred of optometry. We know.

nerd

LuBu, did you get the UAI required for optometry?

Interpreted, this means that you are a optom just missed out guy.

quote]I can't believe how selfish you are as to mislead people by saying that you've done your[/quote]

"The thing is to be open-minded enough to change one's views in the face of facts." The thing is to be open-minded and provide both info about both sides.

"Only 2 types of people deny facts - idiots and lunatics." Only 2 types of people selectively pick facts- morons and wannabes

 

[sikeveo]

Re: Optometry - an overrated but really limited career?

funnybunny, most of your posts dont make sense???

 

[LuBu]

Re: Optometry - an overrated but really limited career?

I will post something, but not waste my time explaining a lot

Translation = I'd like to debate you but I simply can't back up my really half-baked opinions so I am just going to hurl some illogical tripe to sound objective and maybe, alter reality.

I suggest you look at all the other posts listed

I did and realised they were infantile eye sores requiring attention from an ophthamologist.

LuBu, did you get the UAI required for optometry?

Interpreted, this means that you are a optom just missed out guy.

Missed out? Do you and micelite use the same optometrist? You should lodge a complaint for incompetence - you are both still equally cock-eyed. Re-read my posts.

The thing is to be open-minded and provide both info about both sides.

Both sides? Like the delusional side and the downright nonsensical side I have seen so far from people like you? Fanatics here are already doing a better job at this propaganda than the Optometrists themselves.

I never said that Optometry is bad for everyone. But to present it in pristine light is to add to the myths and exaggerated importance surrounding this glorified sales job. 5 years of study is still overtraining for a non-medical and definitely non-surgical profession. On top of that, if you also accept that a specialty salesman job really requires 99+ ENTER, then more power to you. This learned healthcare "profession" of >80% sales and <20% optometric services (=largely, refraction) must stoke the passionate flames of the spectacles-peddlar within you.

Only 2 types of people selectively pick facts- morons and wannabes

Wannabes? You mean like a certain eye-care profession selling itself to the equivalent of low-rent eye doctors and ending up having the medical establishment jumping on them?

I don't know if you and micelite have Optometric aspirations but the Optometry profession should make basic reading and comprehension skills mandatory for entry into the schools.

 

[funnybunny]

Re: Optometry - an overrated but really limited career?

funnybunny, most of your posts dont make sense???

Sorry i dont have time to edit my posts/ put quotes in etc.

""I'd like to debate you but I simply can't back up my really half-baked opinions so I am just going to hurl some illogical tripe to sound objective and maybe, alter reality."

I dont really need to back my opinions, because they are obvious to those with some logic.

"I did and realised they were infantile eye sores requiring attention from an ophthamologist." Do you often lookk in the mirror and realise that also?


"I never said that Optometry is not bad for everyone."
I dont understand your comments., but I never said that you suggested that it is not bad for eveyone.

"Wannabes? You mean like a certain eye-care profession selling itself to the" Is this monkey logic or this meant to be funny"
"I don't know if you and micelite have Optometric aspirations but the Optometry profession should make basic reading and comprehension skills mandatory for entry into the schools." And basic reasoning skills should be important for anyone on this site I never suggested i like optometry, but basically that u need to provide a balanced account.

 

[LuBu]

Re: Optometry - an overrated but really limited career?

I dont really need to back my opinions, because they are obvious to those with some logic.

Translation = I defiantly continue to spout illogical tripe in my own pitiful defense.
That's so characteristically lame.

I never suggested i like optometry, but basically that u need to provide a balanced account.

Funny that you should talk about a "balanced" account when you, like micelite, appear to know next to nothing about the profession and try to fault the "objectivity" of my essays.

My essays are meant to provoke serious thoughts on the shortcomings of the Optometry profession, with established facts. I feel a need to do this because many would-be and current Optometric students are deserving of something better, career-wise, considering the high ENTER score they have attained for this seemingly pompous course.

If potential applicants are turned away by the facts I have presented, then, maybe they are better off doing something else. I don't see a need to incorporate contrived adulations of the profession into my writings for "objectivity" when these superficially sanguine views are so readily available. Thus, I am guilty as charged for being "selective" with the facts. Nevertheless, the truth that Optometry is an overrated career with rather significant practice scope limitation remains indisputable.