Stop Calling Doctors "Providers," Urges ACP, with Jan K. Carney, MD, MPH

The American College of Physicians (ACP) is urging clinicians, health systems, and policymakers to discontinue the routine use of the term “provider” to describe physicians, arguing that the language diminishes professional identity and reframes the patient–physician relationship as a commercial transaction rather than an ethical partnership.

In a new policy paper published in Annals of Internal Medicine, authors Lois Snyder Sulmasy, JD, and Jan K. Carney, MD, MPH, writing on behalf of the ACP Ethics, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee, contend that the terminology issue is not merely semantic but ethical. Language, they argue, shapes how medical care is understood, delivered, and valued—both by patients and by physicians themselves.

“The term provider is derogatory because it diminishes the physician-patient relationship,” said ACP President Jason M. Goldman, MD, MACP, in a press release from the organization. “Physicians are not providers—they are confidants, health advocates, and partners with patients, bound by deep and longstanding ethical responsibilities. And patients are not merely consumers.”

The term “provider” originated in federal Medicare and Medicaid statutes in the 1960s as a broad descriptor for entities delivering reimbursable services. Over time, it expanded to include individual clinicians, institutions, and even insurers. The ACP argues this evolution has blurred important distinctions between the ethical practice of medicine and commercial service delivery.

As the paper outlines, unlike service providers in a marketplace, physicians are bound by fiduciary duties of beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice. The paper warns framing physicians as providers risks reducing clinical care to a transactional exchange governed by contracts and efficiency metrics rather than trust and professional accountability.

The ACP highlights primary care as particularly vulnerable to depersonalized terminology. In team-based models, the term “provider” may obscure meaningful differences in training and scope of practice, potentially confusing patients about who bears responsibility for diagnosis, treatment decisions, and longitudinal care. The authors further argue repeated exposure to transactional language may influence how physicians view their own roles, contributing to concerns about deprofessionalization.

The ACP recommends physicians be referred to as “physicians,” not “providers,” and suggests using “clinicians” or “health care professionals” when referring collectively to members of the care team. Physicians are also encouraged to avoid using the term to describe themselves or colleagues.

While acknowledging the evolving structure of health care delivery, the ACP concludes language must continue to reflect the ethical foundations of medicine. In its view, “physician” and “provider” are not interchangeable—and preserving the distinction is essential to maintaining professional integrity and public trust.

References

1. Snyder Sulmasy L, Carney JK; ACP Ethics, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee. Physicians are not providers: the ethical significance of names in health care. Ann Intern Med. Published February 10, 2026. doi:10.7326/ANNALS-25-03852
2. Physicians Are Not Providers: New ACP Paper Says Names in Health Care Have Ethical Significance. News release. American College of Physicians. February 10, 2026. Accessed February 10, 2026. https://www.acponline.org/acp-newsroom/physicians-are-not-providers-new-acp-paper-says-names-in-health-care-have-ethical-significance

Editor's note: Jan Carney has no relevant disclosures to report