Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Professions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House debates title 'optometric physician' in Optometry Practice Act; amendment fails, bill passes
Summary
Lawmakers debated whether to remove the phrase 'optometric physician' from the Optometry Practice Act, with supporters saying the title reflects training and federal usage and opponents warning it could confuse patients and affect pay; an amendment to delete the phrase failed and the bill passed 66–3.
The Utah House on Feb. 5 debated Senate Bill 20, the Optometry Practice Act, focusing on a proposed amendment to remove the phrase “optometric physician” from the bill.
Representative Dayton moved to delete lines 15–16 on page 3 to prevent use of the term “physician” for optometrists, arguing the title should be reserved for those who attended medical school. Dayton said the title "confuses the public" and "will increase the amount of pay that the insurance companies can give" to those labeled physicians, and that legislative use of the title would dilute incentives for longer specialist training.
Opponents, including Representative Sykes and others, said the wording does not change scope of practice or privileges. Representative Sykes said the optometric profession has "proven, over the past several years, that they want to be compliant with state law," and argued that the phrase recognizes training and professionalism. Representative Gates, offering summation for the amendment’s sponsor, reiterated concern about reserving the title "physician" for medically trained doctors and asked lawmakers to "encourage excellence and choice in medicine." Representative Knutts and others underlined that the bill had been negotiated among the three professional groups (optometrists, ophthalmologists and opticians) and described it as an "agreed bill."
The House voted on the amendment to delete the words (or to remove "optometric physician") and the motion failed. The underlying bill then proceeded and later passed the House, recorded as 66 yes and 3 no.
The debate included multiple speakers who said the bill does not expand optometrists' scope of practice but would alter the titles used in licensing and in some external databases and insurance coding. Advocates for keeping the phrase noted federal Medicare classification and cross-state licensing conventions.
The next step for SB 20 is transmittal to the Senate; the House debate did not produce a change in scope or a formal amendment that would alter provider privileges.
Ending: The House approved SB 20 and forwarded it to the Senate; no further action on the title language was taken at this floor session.
