Yesterday, we testified before the House Health and Government Operations Committee on two of our key bills, HB 968, our Expanded Function Dental Assistants bill, and HB 969, the Maryland State Board of Dental Examiners training and membership bill.
On our Expanded Function Dental Assistant bill, HB 968, we have been working diligently to address concerns of everyone who has spoken out about the bill. Our efforts to reach out to the Maryland Dental Hygiene Association (MDHA) have been recognized by the committee, despite the MDHA representative who testified in opposition to the bill. I think we will come to an agreement that benefits the entire time prior to the subcommittee’s consideration. Of note is the opposition to the bill by the Smile Direct Club. They are advocating for an amendment to allow indirect or general supervision of interoral photography. This means that a dentist could be out of the state and provide dental “care” to Maryland patients. We made very clear today, and over the last several years, that in our state, MARYLAND dentists are involved directly with our patients, and make the decisions on their care-including on the “photography” that needs to be taken to ensure proper care.
The second bill that we testified on, HB 969, very few questions were directed toward us, but questions continued to be raised about the Board of Dental Examiner’s ability to impartially render decisions on a timely basis. We largely spoke about our concerns with provisions to change how Board members are selected. The underlying bill would completely remove the current process and, in turn, the opportunity for licensed dentists to provide a “peer review” of the candidates. Last week in my weekly update, I wrote how the bill cleared the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee without the section of the bill changing the Board membership. We hope the House committee will follow the same path.
Next week we’ll be listening to and testifying about HB 1266, that attempts to put in statute that dentists can perform saliva lead poisoning tests. I plan to testify that HB 1266 has admirable goals, but it does not properly add saliva lead poisoning testing into the scope of practice of dentistry. This is because the bill would set a precedent that all future saliva tests, and for that matter, all future developed dental procedures, should be added to the scope of dental practice through legislation, instead of current law which provides for dentists’ scope of practice to be anything included in the curriculum of an accredited dental school. Just think if we had to go back and ask permission in law for every new test or procedure that comes out!
We will also be opposing SB 10, a workers' compensation bill that would presume that first responders, public safety employees and health care workers, such as ourselves and our staff, are presumed to have an occupational disease that can be compensated through workers’ compensation. This would apply to a positive test or diagnosis for COVID. The bill would be applied retroactively. Considering the utmost care that dentists and our staff went through to make our offices safe, and the Health Policy Institute data that shows transmission of COVID-19 in dental offices was slim to none across the country, this bill seems like a great stretch.
Lastly, don’t forget next week is Dental Assistants Recognition Week. Please take the time to recognize these vital team members as we all work to serve our patients and provide the best care possible.