Relates to improper practices relating to staff membership or professional privileges of a physician and such physician's board certification

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Gustavo Rivera says this is needed

The cost of obtaining and updating board certification status is increasingly becoming prohibitively expensive and time-consuming for many physicians at a time when they are already being squeezed between rapidly increasing office overhead costs and cuts in insurer payment. Physicians are generally granted state medical licenses based upon successfully passing medical school and internship examinations. Beyond that, most physicians aspire to obtain specialty board certification as it helps to denote to the public that the physician is appropriately qualified to treat various medical conditions typically treated by that specialty and advances in healthcare have required physicians to remain current in their own specialty on a continuing basis. Physicians gener- ally remain current in their knowledge base by attending seminars, read- ing journals, discussions with other physicians, and various other endeavors which are designed to continually improve a physician's deliv- ery of medical care. Many also seek to achieve and continually update their board certif- ication status. These various specialty boards belong to a parent organ- ization, the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS), which has become increasingly active in lobbying for recertification examinations to be mandatory on a periodic basis throughout a physician's career. While initial board certification is an important step in a physician's development, recertification on a periodic basis is not only unneces- sary, there is no evidence that such recertification actually improves the delivery of healthcare. Moreover, the costs are becoming increasingly prohibitively expensive. For older physicians, the cost may drive them out of practicing medicine altogether. This legislation would help to ensure that board certif- ication remains aspirational for physicians, but not mandatory, by ensuring that hospitals and health insurance companies cannot impose such requirements as a condition of participation, thereby reducing one barrier to delivering medical care in New York State.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.