Professional jurisdictional boundaries change throughout time due to a myriad of factors such as scientific advances, social changes, or governmental requirements. Research on the negotiation of these jurisdictional changes has primarily focused on the relational dynamics between professions that affect these boundaries. We examine two physician groups that considered jurisdictional changes which were initially antithetical to their core professional identity. The DOs grappled with whether or not to incorporate drug therapy into their practice, and generalist MDs had to decide whether or not to become a specialty. We find that jurisdictional negotiations also occur within a profession, not just between them. We argue that for a profession to pursue a change in scope, members must settle on an interpretation of their professional identity congruent with the potential jurisdictional change.