Mississippi Senate Bill SB2891

Mississippi 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/22
• Refer: 1/17/22
• Failed: 2/1/22

Caption

State Board of Medical Licensure; revise certain provisions relating to licensure.

Impact

The legislation significantly changes the landscape of medical practice in Mississippi by simplifying and clarifying the licensing and renewal processes. By introducing a special volunteer medical license for retired physicians wishing to serve medically underprivileged communities, the bill aims to enhance healthcare accessibility. This could also increase the availability of medical services in underserved regions. However, Section 2891 repeals older provisions that pertain to various aspects of medical licensure, which may have broader implications for existing medical practitioners and the oversight mechanisms of the Board of Medical Licensure.

Summary

Senate Bill 2891 seeks to amend various provisions within the Mississippi Code regarding medical licensure. This bill outlines that the practice of medicine includes both allopathic and osteopathic medicine and specifically defines a physician as either a medical doctor or a doctor of osteopathic medicine. The bill establishes clearer applications for obtaining medical licenses, including the requirement for applicants to provide their social security number and consent to identification methods. It also permits the Board of Medical Licensure to issue temporary licenses under defined circumstances and modifies the process for license renewal and reinstatement, particularly addressing scenarios where physicians have let their licenses lapse due to legitimate reasons.

Contention

Debate surrounding SB 2891 may stem from concerns regarding the balance between regulatory oversight and the accessibility of medical services. Critics might argue that streamlining the requirements could potentially reduce the quality of medical practice by allowing less rigorous adherence to standards that previously existed. Furthermore, the amendments dealing with disciplinary actions against practitioners introduce stringent protocols, which could raise concerns about due process for those facing license restrictions or revocations. Stakeholders from various medical sectors are likely to weigh in on these potential regulatory easing effects versus their implications on patient care standards.