2023 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations › Chapter 447 - Dentistry examining board. › 447.07 - Disciplinary proceedings.

447.07
Disciplinary proceedings.
(1)
The examining board may, without further notice or process, limit, suspend, or revoke the license or certificate of any dentist or dental hygienist, or the registration of a mobile dentistry program registrant, who fails, within 60 days after the mailing of written notice to the dentist's, dental hygienist's, or registrant's last-known address, to renew the license, certificate, or registration.
(3)
Subject to the rules promulgated under s. 440.03 (1), the examining board may make investigations and conduct hearings in regard to any alleged action of any dentist, dental hygienist, or expanded function dental auxiliary, of a mobile dentistry program registrant, or of any other person it has reason to believe is engaged in or has engaged in the practice of dentistry or dental hygiene, or the operation of a mobile dentistry program, in this state, and may, on its own motion, or upon complaint in writing, reprimand any dentist, dental hygienist, or expanded function dental auxiliary who is licensed or certified under this chapter, or any mobile dentistry program registrant, or deny, limit, suspend, or revoke his or her license or certificate, or the registration of the mobile dentistry program registrant, if it finds that the dentist, dental hygienist, expanded function dental auxiliary, or mobile dentistry program registrant has done any of the following:
(a)
Engaged in unprofessional conduct or violated the standards of conduct established by the examining board under s. 447.02 (2) (g).
(b)
Made any false statement or given any false information in connection with an application for a license, certificate, or registration or for renewal or reinstatement of a license, certificate, or registration, or received a license, certificate, or registration through error.
(c)
Been adjudicated mentally incompetent by a court.
(d)
Directly or indirectly sent, for a purpose other than shade verification, impressions or measurements to a dental laboratory without a written work authorization on a form approved by the examining board and signed by the authorizing dentist, or directly or indirectly sent a patient, or an agent of a patient, to a dental laboratory for any purpose other than for shade verification. The examining board or its agents or employees may inspect dental offices and the work authorization records of dental laboratories to determine compliance with this paragraph.
(e)
Subject to ss. 111.321, 111.322, and 111.335, been convicted of a crime, the circumstances of which substantially relate to the practice of dentistry or dental hygiene, the practice of an expanded function dental auxiliary, or the operation of a mobile dentistry program.
(f)
Violated this chapter or any federal or state statute or rule that relates to the practice of dentistry, dental hygiene, or an expanded function dental auxiliary, or the operation of a mobile dentistry program.
(g)
Subject to ss. 111.321, 111.322 and 111.34, practiced dentistry or dental hygiene or as an expanded function dental auxiliary while his or her ability was impaired by alcohol or other drugs.
(h)
Engaged in conduct that indicates a lack of knowledge of, an inability to apply or the negligent application of, principles or skills of dentistry or dental hygiene or the practice of an expanded function dental auxiliary.
(i)
Obtained or attempted to obtain compensation by fraud or deceit.
(j)
Employed, directly or indirectly, any unlicensed or uncertified person to perform any act requiring licensure or certification under this chapter.
(k)
Engaged in repeated irregularities in billing a 3rd party for services rendered to a patient. In this paragraph, “irregularities in billing" includes:
1.
Reporting charges for the purpose of obtaining a total payment in excess of that usually received for the services rendered.
2.
Reporting incorrect treatment dates for the purpose of obtaining payment.
3.
Reporting charges for services not rendered.
4.
Incorrectly reporting services rendered for the purpose of obtaining payment.
5.
Abrogating the copayment provisions of a contract by agreeing to forgive any or all of the patient's obligation for payment under the contract.
(L)
Violated ch. 450 or 961.
(m)
Made a substantial misrepresentation in the course of practice, or in the operation of a mobile dentistry program, that was relied upon by a client.
(n)
Violated any order of the examining board.
(o)
Advertised by using a statement that tends to deceive or mislead the public.
(5)
The examining board may reinstate a license, certificate, or registration that has been voluntarily surrendered or revoked on terms and conditions that it considers appropriate. This subsection does not apply to a license or registration that is revoked under s. 440.12.
(7)
In addition to or in lieu of a reprimand or denial, limitation, suspension, or revocation of a license, certificate, or registration under sub. (3), the examining board may assess against an applicant, licensee, certificate holder, or mobile dentistry program registrant a forfeiture of not more than $5,000 for each violation enumerated under sub. (3).
History:  1975 c. 94 s. 91 (12); 1977 c. 29; 1977 c. 418; 1979 c. 162; 1981 c. 65, 380; 1981 c. 391 ss. 169, 211; 1983 a. 289; 1985 a. 29, 146; 1987 a. 316; 1989 a. 349; 1995 a. 448; 1997 a. 96, 97, 237; 2013 a. 244; 2021 a. 254.
Tort-based informed consent law requires a showing that a failure to disclose information caused actual injury. The standards of unprofessional conduct do not require such a showing. Unprofessional conduct includes practicing in a manner that substantially departs from the standard of care ordinarily exercised by a dentist that harms or could have harmed a patient. Painter v. Dentistry Examining Board, 2003 WI App 123, 265 Wis. 2d 248, 665 N.W.2d 397, 02-2218.
The 5-pronged test of Gimenez, 203 Wis. 2d 349, does not apply to cases in which fraud and misrepresentation are alleged. Gimenez expressly limits the application of the test to cases in which the medical professional is charged with choosing a course of treatment that is dangerous or detrimental to his or her patient or the public. It does not apply to allegations of unprofessional conduct by perpetrating a fraud on a patient in an attempt to obtain compensation. Krahenbuhl v. Wisconsin Dentistry Examining Board, 2006 WI App 73, 292 Wis. 2d 154, 713 N.W.2d 152, 05-1376.