Case Study: After leaving the employment of a dental office, you tell patients how your former supervisor/employer dentist was not current in practice, that is, not keeping up to date in the field of dentistry and the delivery of oral health services. Although there was no actual harm to any patient, the dentist did not practice with a high standard of care. That was the main reason you left the office (i.e., the potential of harm). Your motive is not to have them switch to the new office, where you are currently working, but simply to inform them.
Have you violated any ethical principles? Have you committed a crime or civil wrong? Is the dentist being negligent by not keeping up in dentistry? Is the dentist guilty of malpractice? Has the dental hygienist committed slander? Has the dental hygienist acted ethically by "warning" her patients?
Discussion Question: Debate the issue of levels of supervision found in a practice act.
Do you feel that one standard is appropriate for one setting and not for another? Why do you think a dental practice act is written with various levels of supervision?