2009 House Bill 498: Create Scope of Practice and Ethics Rules for Radiology and Sonography Practices

Legislation watch

Public Act 106 of 2009

Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next

Introduced by Rep. Jeff Steinborn (D) on February 2, 2009, to require the Environmental Health Division to establish scope of practice and ethics rules for persons providing radiology and sonography.
- Referred to the House Health and Government Affairs Committee on February 2, 2009.
  - Substitute offered in the House on February 12, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises various details, but does not change its substance. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on February 12, 2009.
- Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on February 12, 2009.
  - Substitute offered in the House on February 19, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises various details, but does not change its substance. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on February 19, 2009.
- Reported in the House on February 19, 2009.
Passed 66 to 0 in the House on February 21, 2009, to require the Environmental Health Division to establish scope of practice and ethics rules for persons providing radiology and sonography.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Received in the Senate on February 21, 2009.
- Referred to the Senate Public Affairs Committee on February 21, 2009.
  - Amendment offered in the Senate on March 11, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance of the bill as previously described. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on March 11, 2009.
- Referred to the Senate Judicary Committee on March 11, 2009.
- Reported in the Senate on March 15, 2009.
- Amendment offered in the Senate on March 19, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises various details, but does not change its substance. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on March 19, 2009.
Passed 29 to 0 in the Senate on March 19, 2009, to require the Environmental Health Division to establish scope of practice and ethics rules for persons providing radiology and sonography.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Signed by Gov. Bill Richardson on April 6, 2009, to require the Environmental Health Division to establish scope of practice and ethics rules for persons providing radiology and sonography.

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) Re: 2009 House Bill 498 by LD37 on March 2, 2009

"No training or competency required"? Are you kidding me? I am a diagnostic medical sonographer who takes exception to your post.

I am a board certified diagnostic medical sonographer, credentialed through the American Registry for Diagnostic Medical Sonography (ARDMS). The ARDMS is considered the gold standard in the world for credentialing ultrasound professionals in eleven subspecialty exams. While the state may not yet require liscensing, the medical community does.

As it is currently written, NM HB 498/ SB616 contains a great deal of misinformation, incorrect terminology and wordage and does not accurately represent the diagnostic medical sonography profession. While creating accountability for imaging professionals through standard credentialing and practice requirements is a necessary and valuable concept, enforcement of this bill would not accomplish that goal and, in fact, would result in a giant step backwards in our professional development. All medical imaging specialty areas cannot be put into a single package and described by agencies in the bill that do not even represent diagnostic medical sonography, namely the ARRT and ASRT. In fact, the Society of Diagnostic Medical Sonography (SDMS), the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine AIUM), the Society of Vascular Ultrasound SVU), and the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) are some of the national societies for ultrasound professionals who have spent the past twenty years specifically identifying those standards and goals of practice. These organizations were inappropriately not mentioned in this entire bill or contacted for their input. Their published guidelines would be beneficial in addressing issues of standards and need to be considered on the front end of a licensing process, so that New Mexico is synchronous with thoroughly established national guidelines.

Line

2) Re: 2009 House Bill 498 by concerned citizen1 on February 24, 2009

It's a scary thing to realize that there is no training or competency required for someone to practice ultrasound to date. This is an important bill that would require those in the profession to have a license to practice. If my hairdresser needs a license, why doesn't my sonographer?

Line

3) 2009 House Bill 498 by admin on January 1, 2001
Introduced in the House on February 2, 2009

The vote was 66 in favor, 0 opposed and 4 not voting

(House Roll Call 0 at House Journal 0)

Click here to view bill details.
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation