Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 17
02/02/2005 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB93 | |
| HB90 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 90 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 93 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 93-DENTISTS AND DENTAL HYGIENISTS CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 93, "An Act relating to dentists and dental hygienists and the Board of Dental Examiners; establishing certain committees for the discipline and peer review of dentists; excluding the adjudicatory proceedings of the Board of Dental Examiners and its committees from the Administrative Procedure Act and from the jurisdiction of the office of administrative hearings; and providing for an effective date." 3:22:59 PM JON BITTNER, Staff to Representative Anderson, started off by stating that the committee should have a CS for HB 93. CHAIR ANDERSON moved to adopt the CSHB 93, Version 24-LS0384/G, for discussion purposes. There being no objection, Version G was before the committee. 3:23:34 PM MR. BITTNER began by stating that there were five amended sections. The first one is on page 11, after 'dentistry' where we added 'dental hygiene', and on line 13, we added 'dental hygienists'. Page three, line 7-9, adds the words " threatens or compromises patient care, has the potential to compromise patient care, or after disability'. We added this into the bill to protect against discrimination. Page five, lines 18-20, we add 'a copy of the summary published under this paragraph shall be delivered to the named licensee if possible the delivery will be by electronic mail or facsimile'. Page ten, line one, has been amended to add 'a mediator approved by the board', to replace 'either a dentist or attorney licensed to practice in the state'. This has been added to allow dentists to serve as mediators. This amendment is something of an oversight from when the bill was first legislated. CHAIR ANDERSON asked Mr. Bittner to sum up why his staff sponsors the bill. MR. BITTNER stated that basically, this brings the expertise of dentists and hygienists to the process of reviews, complaints, within the industry. It also empowers the dental board to impose remedial measures and disciplinary actions. It gives the board the authority to refer certain types of complaints to a peer review committee, and more serious complaints will go to a disciplinary committee. The board will have the authority to suspend licenses of those that endanger the public health. It will add uniform standards to the dental practice in Alaska. It gives patients a peer review process to address their concerns. CHAIR ANDERSON asked if Mr. Bittner could give an example of what would happen within the new process should a crime be committed by a dentist. MR. BITTNER stated that one of the things that HB 90 addresses is the availability of drug and alcohol treatment. This gives a dentist that has a drinking problem, the family can intervene on his behalf and go to the board who then can ask the dentist to seek help or suffer penalties. CHAIR ANDERSON stated that the great thing about this is that it has fellow dentists analyze these problems. Its like youth court for young offenders. MR. BITTNER said that they understand the problems best and they also understand the techniques that are desirable in dentistry. 3:28:15 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked what kind of physical or mental disability would not threaten patient care. MR. BITTNER stated that a disorder like Tourette's Syndrome could be an example. He then retorted that it has not been specifically laid out. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN understood this but acknowledged that he was not sure if he wanted a dentist working on his teeth while yelling out expletives. MR. BITTNER answered absolutely and commented that there are many less severe mental disorders that are out there. He then commented that it would be up to the board to make this determination. CHAIR ANDERSON took this further and stated that dyslexia is an example of an affliction that is less severe. He then goes to public discussion. 3:30:11 PM DR. GEORGE SCHAFFER, licensed dentist for the past 25 years, member of the executive council of Alaska Dental Society, began by stating that he had a roommate in dental school who was certified paranoid. He was worried that the world was out to get him, and that despite this mental disorder, he was able to function in the profession and run a successful practice. His problems did not affect his patients. They affected his personal being only. CHAIR ANDERSON asked what Dr. Schaffer thought of as the merits of the bill before the committee today. DR. GEORGE SCHAFFER started off by stating that dentistry is a very different profession. Medicine, law, and engineering are almost always practiced in groups. Dentistry is practiced alone in a single office. Dentists do not have other professionals looking over their shoulders. The concern here is that they rely on the state licensing board to judge the dentist's practicing ability. He went on to say that when he served on the board, a complaint would come in, and it was investigated by someone in law who would then hand it over to the board. The board does not see the name or any of the evidence. They get what the investigator has related in the summation. They also get an advisory opinion on any action that should be taken. The problem here is that the board has no name, no evidence, and no real part in the investigation. The professionals need to see the evidence before they are forced to make a decision against a fellow dental practitioner. DR. SCHAFFER went on to say that the new bill does this and defines the standards how the evidence is gathered and how it is handled when it is in the state's hands. He finished by stating that this bill allows the president or vice president of the board to 'triage a complaint'. If it is something very serious, the board as a whole will deal with the complaint. If it is less severe, like polishing teeth when not permitted to do so, then these issues are put into peer review or a disciplinary committee. The president of the board would decide the severity of the complaints and the penalties. One of the three groups: the peer review, the disciplinary committee, or the whole board itself will address the issues. CHAIR ANDERSON decided that unless there was a pressing question, he would ask Dr. Schaffer to be available next time the bill is heard. 3:37:55 PM DR. ROBINSON, general dentist in Alaska for 40 years, member on the board of Dental Examiners, added two things to the testimony given by Dr. Schaffer. He started by stating that is possible that a case be dismissed after review. The other thing is that this bill puts in writing the program for substance abuse that is available and gives it further credibility. CHAIR ANDERSON stated that his staff and Mr. Urion at the Department of Occupational Licensing would work on this bill. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if the chair was expecting substantial rewrite from Mr. Urion. CHAIR ANDERSON answered that he did not think so. He then announced that he was holding public testimony until next time. [HB 93 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|