- Joined
- Oct 12, 2004
- Messages
- 819
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm sure the vast majority of you have now all heard of this bill introduced by Rep. Sullivan (R-OK) that purports to eliminate deceptive representation in the provision of health care, but I thought it might be worth discussing.
Basically this bill would prohibit non-MD/DO, DDS/DMD health care professionals from holding themselves out as such (which is fine) and from describing ones "profession, skills, training, experience, education, or licensure in a fashion that causes the public ... to believe that such person is" an MD/DO or DDS/DMD - which could be a problem for optometry.
Also, the bill includes language which I would take exception to by implying that OD's (amont others) chronically misrepresent themselves as medical doctors (and dentists?). This stikes me as slanderous.
While upon a quick look at the bills text it probably looks innocuous , I am concerned about the very vague manner in which it is written - ambiguities that are cause for alarm. Would this bill push the FTC to investigate OD's that make use of the titles, such as "doctor," granted to them by privilege of state licensure b/c the AMA says patients might think an optometrist is an MD?
Basically this bill would prohibit non-MD/DO, DDS/DMD health care professionals from holding themselves out as such (which is fine) and from describing ones "profession, skills, training, experience, education, or licensure in a fashion that causes the public ... to believe that such person is" an MD/DO or DDS/DMD - which could be a problem for optometry.
Also, the bill includes language which I would take exception to by implying that OD's (amont others) chronically misrepresent themselves as medical doctors (and dentists?). This stikes me as slanderous.
While upon a quick look at the bills text it probably looks innocuous , I am concerned about the very vague manner in which it is written - ambiguities that are cause for alarm. Would this bill push the FTC to investigate OD's that make use of the titles, such as "doctor," granted to them by privilege of state licensure b/c the AMA says patients might think an optometrist is an MD?
jefguth said:AOA Exposes and Rallies Opposition to AMA-Backed Scope of Practice Bill
U.S. Congressman John Sullivan (R-OK), a consistent opponent of the concerns of optometrists and their patients, has introduced and is attempting to build support for legislation apparently backed by organized medicine aimed at usurping states licensing and policing authority for doctoral health care providers. A draft of the bill, introduced as HR 5688, the Healthcare Truth and Transparency Act of 2006, was exposed on Capitol Hill by the AOA as an apparent component of the American Medical Associations nationwide scope of practice study and Scope of Practice Partnership designed to provide backing to AMA federation members who have scope of practice battles.
There he goes again, said Michele Haranin, O.D., AOA Federal Relations Committee Chair. When considering this flawed and misguided legislation, we should remember that Congress rejected Rep. Sullivans 2003 bill aimed at restricting the scope of practice of the hundreds of dedicated optometrists providing outstanding care to our veterans in the VA health care system. Although its disappointing to see any elected official put special interests ahead of patients, optometry is ready once again to respond and ensure that Congress has all the facts.
The premise of HR 5688 is expressed in its findings that suggest the American public is confused about practice authority of health care practitioners except for physicians and dentists. The findings also declare that there is ample evidence that non-physician provider groups are touting their practice authority inappropriately, thus further confusing the public. The bill would bring in the Federal Trade Commission to investigate conduct of doctoral providers and enforce violations found under the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Reps. Gene Green (D-TX), Charles Bass (R-NH), Michael Burgess, MD (R-TX), John Schwartz, MD (R-MI) and Pete Sessions (R-TX) have joined with Sullivan as original co-sponsors of HR 5688.
Since uncovering plans for this bill to be introduced, the AOA both individually and as a leader of a coalition of doctoral providers -- has been urging Members of Congress to oppose it and to again reject organized medicines efforts to misinform patients, malign the integrity of optometrists and other doctoral providers, and undermine the authority of the states to license health care providers.
Dr. Haranin and the AOA Washington Office both confirmed that the AOA will continue to lead the effort to educate Members of Congress about this misguided effort to turn back the clock on patient safety and access to quality health care.
Attached please find:
2. The Bill Text
3. Congressman Sullivan's press release
4. Press release from the Chart coalition