Grounds for Discipline, Unprofessional Conduct, and Prohibited Practices
Grounds for discipline, unprofessional conduct, and prohibited practices
This domain tests the conduct that can cost an optometrist a license. The exam often gives a fact pattern and asks whether the conduct is a ground for discipline, a scope violation, or both.
Core rules
Maryland statutes and Board regulations list grounds including fraud or deceit in obtaining a license; unprofessional conduct; incompetence; gross or repeated negligence; violation of the optometry statutes or regulations; conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude or related to practice; impairment from drugs or alcohol; aiding unlicensed practice; fee splitting; false or misleading advertising; failing to maintain records; and abandoning a patient. Prohibited practices include practicing outside scope, prescribing without an appropriate examination, delegating reserved acts to unlicensed persons, self-prescribing or prescribing for family members outside accepted care, and exploiting the patient relationship. 'Unprofessional conduct' is intentionally broad and can include record falsification, boundary violations, and failure to cooperate with the Board.
Worked example
An optometrist gives a friend a contact lens prescription without examining the friend, saying 'he just wants the same numbers.' Reasoning: prescribing contact lenses without a proper examination and fitting violates the standard of care and the statutory scope of prescribing; the friend's convenience is not an exception. The conduct can support discipline even if the lenses fit.
Traps that cost marks
Do not assume a single act is too minor for discipline; one serious act can suffice. Do not assume good intentions are a defense. Do not confuse a billing dispute with a clinical violation, but note that fraudulent billing can independently support discipline. Do not assume that because another provider also erred, the optometrist is shielded.