Connecticut Senate Bill SB00799

Connecticut 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/25/11
• Refer: 1/25/11
• Refer: 3/16/11
• Report Pass: 3/21/11
• Refer: 3/31/11
• Report Pass: 4/6/11
• Refer: 4/21/11
• Report Pass: 4/26/11
• Report Pass: 4/27/11
• Engrossed: 5/11/11
• Report Pass: 5/12/11
• Chaptered: 6/28/11
• Enrolled: 6/30/11
• Passed: 7/13/11

Caption

An Act Concerning Misrepresentation As A Board Certified Behavior Analyst.

Impact

The passage of SB00799 provides significant implications for the regulation of behavior analysts within the state. It ensures that only qualified professionals can claim such certifications, thereby raising the standard of care and professionalism within the field. This requirement is intended to enhance public trust in behavior analysis services and to reduce the risk of harm that could arise from unqualified individuals representing themselves as certified professionals. Violations of this provision entail legal ramifications, including monetary fines and possible imprisonment for offenders.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 799 addresses the misrepresentation of certified behavior analysts in Connecticut. The bill establishes critical regulations surrounding the use of specific titles and abbreviations related to behavior analysis certification. It explicitly states that only individuals certified by the Behavior Analyst Certification Board may use the terms 'board certified behavior analyst' or 'board certified assistant behavior analyst'. By enforcing these standards, the bill aims to protect consumers from potentially fraudulent or unauthorized practices in behavior analysis services.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding the bill appears largely positive among proponents who advocate for stricter regulations in professional certification. Supporters argue that it strengthens the integrity of the profession and protects the public from potential deceit. While discussions on the bill may not have seen significant opposition in terms of debate within the legislative assembly, it is reasonable to interpret that those within the field may have varying views regarding the necessity and implications of such licensing regulations.

Contention

One notable point of contention could arise from the enforcement of penalties for misrepresentation. Critics might argue that the fines and potential imprisonment seem severe and could disproportionately affect individuals who may unintentionally misrepresent their qualifications. The title protection aspect of the bill could also lead to debates around the accessibility of such qualifications and whether it unduly limits entry into the profession while aiming to maintain standards.