Professional Conduct, Ethics, and Disciplinary Process
This domain tests fiduciary duties, boundary management, record integrity, and how Michigan handles complaints against optometrists.
Core rules
- Optometrists owe patients confidentiality, informed consent, objective advice, and records that accurately reflect care. Fees cannot be used to withhold records from a lawful request or investigation.
- Advertising must be truthful and not misleading. Patient testimonials and social-media posts require consent and must not disclose protected health information.
- Impairment, fraud, gross negligence, criminal convictions, and unprofessional conduct are disciplinary grounds. Licensees should not practice impaired or retaliate against complainants.
- The disciplinary process generally moves from complaint to BPL investigation, administrative complaint, and either a consent order or hearing, followed by sanctions such as reprimand, probation, suspension, revocation, fines, CE, or restitution.
Worked example
A licensee posts a close-up of a patient’s distinctive eye on social media with the caption “look at this rare finding.” The patient is identifiable to friends. Reasoning: consent for treatment is not consent for marketing; identifiers and context can breach confidentiality even without a name. The safer course is written authorization or de-identification. If a complaint follows, an apology does not erase the record or prevent discipline.
Traps that cost marks
- Altering records after a complaint-spoliation undermines credibility.
- Assuming HIPAA alone defines Michigan discipline; state law and Board rules also apply.
- Discussing cases in public or online without authorization.
- Ignoring a Board subpoena because of a fee dispute.
- Treating a consent order as “not really discipline.”