Standardizing the Professional Title of Medical Laboratory Professionals
A Position Paper of
American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) and the American
Society for Clinical Pathology Board of Certification (ASCP BOC)
The following sponsoring and participating societies of the ASCP BOC Board of Governors (BOG) support
this position paper: AABB, American Association of Pathologists’ Assistants (AAPA; Association of Genetic
Technologists (AGT); American Society of Cytopathology (ASC); American Society for Clinical Laboratory
Science (ASCLS); American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP), American Society for Microbiology
(ASM); Clinical Laboratory Management Association (CLMA); National Society for Histotechnology (NSH).
Problem Summary
The medical laboratory profession has played an integral role in patient care, diagnosis, and treatment
for approximately a century. There is, however, a lack of understanding among the public as well as
other health care professionals of who we are, the nature of our work, and the critical influence
laboratory data has on diagnosis and treatment. In addition, these groups do not comprehend the level
of education and training necessary to achieve competency as a Medical Laboratory Scientist (MLS).
Laboratory professionals feel a lack of respect from other healthcare professionals who should view us
as peers. This may be due, in part, to the fact that we have limited direct patient interaction and/or that
laboratories are often ‘invisible’ behind locked doors, in the basement, in separate buildings, or off site.
Interpretation of federal regulations governing standards for laboratory personnel has allowed those
with insufficient laboratory-related education and training to perform moderate and complex testing,
further diminishing the profession and confusing the health care community regarding required
credentials for laboratory professionals.
Another aspect to this problem is that many educational programs closed in the 1990s, resulting in a
workforce shortage that has lasted more than 20 years. In response, managers and administrators have
hired non-Medical Laboratory Scientist credentialed individuals to perform laboratory testing.
To further complicate this situation, our professional credentials, how we refer to ourselves, how others
refer to us, and the job/position titles for similarly educated individuals are not consistent. We refer to
ourselves as Medical Technologists or Clinical Laboratory Scientists or Medical Laboratory Scientists,
depending on degree program, certification, or job title. Job titles often do not reflect current
professional credential designations. Some facilities use Medical Technologist while others have
adopted the current professional credential designation of Medical Laboratory Scientist. Individuals use
casual, non-professional terms such as ’med tech’, ‘lab tech’, or ‘tech’ in referring to laboratory
professionals. Unlike physicians, nurses, physical therapists, or other health care professionals, we have
not adopted a single identity/title that in turn denotes us as a recognizable profession.
These factors contribute to a crisis in our professional identity not only within, but also external to the
medical laboratory profession. Our name is important. Adopting a unified term is one step toward
controlling our professional destiny. If we don’t refer to ourselves in a consistent, recognizable,