BILL ANALYSIS
----------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:April 8, 2002 |Bill No:AB |
| |1026 |
----------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
Senator Liz Figueroa, Chair
Bill No: AB 1026Author:Oropeza
As Amended:April 1, 2002 Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: Healing Arts: dentists - advertising
SUMMARY: This bill restricts the conditions under which a
licensed dentist may advertise himself or herself as a
"specialist," or advertise an area of practice
specialization.
Existing law:
1)Makes it unlawful for healing arts licensees, including
dentists, to provide or advertise false or misleading
statements, photographs, etc., in order to induce the
rendering of professional services or the rendering of
products from the licensee's professional practice or
business.
2)Specifies various types of advertisements that are
restricted pursuant to the false/misleading advertising
prohibition and various types of advertising that are
permissible, including a provision permitting advertising
to include a statement that the practitioner is certified
by a private or public board, or agency, or a statement
that the practitioner limits his or her practice to
specific fields.
3)Provides for the licensing and regulation of dentists by
the Dental Board of California (DBC), and restricts a
licensed dentist, who limits his or her practice to a
specific field or fields, to only include a statement
that he or she is certified by a board or association if
the board or association is recognized by the DBC.
AB 1026
Page 2
4)Restricts a licensed physician from advertising that he
or she is certified or eligible for certification by a
board or parent association unless the board or
association is: (a) an American Board of Medical
Specialties member board, (b) a board or association with
equivalent requirements that is approved by the licensed
physician's licensing board, or (c) has an Accreditation
Council for Graduate Medical Education approved
postgraduate training program that provides complete
training in the specialty or subspecialty.
5)Prohibits a licensed physician from using the term "board
certified" unless the certifying organization is a board
or organization that meets the requirements specified in
#4 above.
This bill:
1)Prohibits a licensed dentist from advertising that he or
she is a "specialist," or "specializes" in an area of
practice, unless he or she is certified or eligible for
certification by a dental specialty board recognized by
the American Dental Association (ADA), in the area of
practice in which specialization is advertised, or by a
dental specialty board with equivalent requirements
approved by the DBC.
2)Requires a licensed dentist who is not certified or
eligible for certification by a board recognized by the
ADA or a dental specialty board with equivalent
requirements approved by the DBC to state that he or she
is a general dentist in any advertisement that describes
his or her practice as limited to a specific field of
dentistry.
3)Specifies that a dental specialty board approved by the
DBC must provide both a didactic and clinical curriculum
to practitioners who seek certification by that Board.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed to go to
fiscal committee. Violations of the bill's expanded
advertising prohibitions would be misdemeanors - and the
bill contains a crimes and infractions disclaimer of local
law enforcement costs.
COMMENTS:
AB 1026
Page 3
1.Purpose. This bill is intended to protect the public
from being misled by specialty advertising that implies
that there is an established dental specialty field where
none exists, and that an advertising dentist has
expertise derived from some education and training in a
particular area of practice when that is not necessarily
true. The bill provides a specific statutory prohibition
against a dentist's advertising that he or she
"specializes" in a field of dentistry for which there is
no ADA-recognized specialty and related ADA-recognized
specialty certification board, or their equivalent
recognized by California's state dental licensing board -
the Dental Board of California.
2.Background. This bill is sponsored by the California
Dental Association (CDA). According to the author and
the CDA, currently there are dentists who hold themselves
out to the public through advertisements as "implant
specialists" or specialists in "cosmetic dentistry,"
where there is no bona fide area of specialization that
is recognized by either the ADA or the Dental Board. The
CDA notes that currently there are eight (8) specialties
recognized by the ADA - endodontics, periodontics,
prosthodontics, orthodontics, pediatric dentistry, oral
surgery, oral radiology, and oral pathology. In order to
be eligible for ADA-recognition, a dental specialty must,
among other things, "be a distinct and well-defined field
which requires unique knowledge and skills beyond those
commonly possessed by dental school graduates?."
Existing law states that a licensed dentist who limits his
or her practice to a specific field or fields, shall only
include a statement that he or she is certified or
eligible for certification by a private or public board
or parent association recognized by the dentist's
licensing board (the DBC). Historically, the DBC has only
recognized those boards or associations officially
recognized by the ADA. The DBC sought to propose
regulations that would provide criteria for when a board
or association could be recognized by the DBC, and
thereby allowing dentists certified by those boards or
associations to advertise that certification. However, a
lawsuit filed by the American Academy of Implant
Dentistry (AAID), which is not recognized by the ADA,
resulted in the DBC's proposed regulations being declared
AB 1026
Page 4
unconstitutional. Consequently the sponsor states that,
due to this court decision, the DBC's current statutory
authority to set minimum consumer protection standards
for "specialty" advertising has been called into
question.
3.Arguments in Support. The CDA argues that certification
in the current eight ADA-recognized dental specialties
requires a dentist to have successfully completed both
didactic and clinical curriculum in that specialty,
assuring that he or she will have expertise in that
specialty. The CDA states that it believes that minimum
standards for the advertisement of non-ADA-recognized
dental disciplines, such as implant dentistry, laser
dentistry, and cosmetic dentistry, provide legitimate and
important consumer protections against potential
incompetence.
According to the CDA there are many weekend or
correspondence (e.g. via the Internet) courses that
provide a participant with a piece of paper (credential),
but which do not offer any real or sufficient training.
CDA also argues, that it is inappropriate and misleading
to imply expertise or specialty in an area of dentistry
that is routinely provided by a general dentist such as
cosmetic dentistry (e.g. applying tooth veneers or
whitening teeth).
4.The CDA states, that this bill follows the model that has
worked successfully for physicians and the Medical Board
of California, and thus will clarify the authority and
role of the DBC to specify minimum standards for
specialty advertising. SB 2036 (McCorquodale - 1990)
established a procedure for the Medical Board to regulate
the advertising of board certification by physicians that
authorizes such advertising if the physician is certified
by a board approved by a recognized national medical
specialty certifying organization or a board with
equivalent requirements that is approved by the Medical
Board.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:California Dental Association ( CDA - sponsor)
AB 1026
Page 5
Opposition:None received.
Consultant:Jay J. DeFuria