Ken Bellone
Thu. 7 Jun.18,
19:52
[Reply (9 of 10) to:
'ARMRIT in California?'
started by: 'James Benitez'
on Wed. 4 Jan.12]
 Category:
Organisations
|
| ARMRIT in California? |
Im not a fan of anyone being overly critical of one or the other. Personally, I'm an ARRT tech certified in R and MR. I know Jim Coffin was trying to get AMRIT off the griound decades ago, and i thought "no way is this joker going to get this to fly ". That's not to say that Jim is a joker, but I knew he was one guy fighting a monopoly.
Let me say that he's done a hell of a job. He's gained more traction than I ever expected. I've known a bunch of his techs here in NY and I have a pretty positive view of them. I presently work with one and he's one of the best techs I've worked with. I'd let him scan my own wife.
On the other hand, I've been the manager of outpatient MRI at a major medical center and I wouldn't let most of the techs scan my cat.
I don't think you NEED to have a radiography background to be a good MRI Tech, but the experience from a clinical perspective has made me a far more well rounded technologist, but that's just me. I would have hired a qualified AMRIT tech, but my hospital didn't allow it. FWIW, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, one of the country's premier cancer center will hire AMRIT techs.
Ultimately, it's the individual doing the scan that makes the difference. I do think ARRT Rad Techs doing MR should get certified within a fixed period of time.....ie 6 mos-1 year. I have witnessed while lot of "button pushers".
My personal above to anyone considering a career in the field, I would go the RT route, as it is more widely accepted AND what is missed in the discussion is that you are a lot more marketable because you have the opportunity to learn and perform other modalities. There's a caveat. If AMRIT is legal in your state and they're hiring, I wouldn't hesitate to go that route. I just think that ARRT affords you more options.
Both have good and bad techs
|
|
 View the whole thread | |
bottom
top
