Talk:Sharon Mitchell/Definition

I think that her "doctorate" should have quotations marks around it. However worthy she may be as a person, she simply does not have any real credentials. Hayford Peirce 14:33, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I had wondered about that, and checked. Her school is accredited by California for vocational training, and it does license some of its graduates as practitioners. It's more than your average fly-by-night, as it has a respected library and museum.

It's been a while, but I have had email conversations with her on antibiotic therapy. Now, you might claim neither one of us has credentials and a right to discuss that, but I will put my discussion points before any infectious disease subspecialist physician. There were details that I explained to her, but she also explained details about her patient base that I would not have realized.

Let's work on a compromise here. I'm perfectly willing to flesh out an article on the school, note that it is not accredited but has a state accreditation that allows lower-level graduates to be licensed California healthcare practitioners. Now, I'm not always comfortable with people California licenses; I know a tattoo/piercing practitioner who is licensed but does kinky things that I consider far beyond her knowledge level.

I am trying to work with you, but not everyone in CZ governance has the same view of credentials -- I'm not referring to myself alone.

Doctorate in quotes really doesn't mean much. How about "alternative" or "nontraditional degree" piped to "doctor"? Howard C. Berkowitz 15:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)