The Fight Over Who Gets to Be a Dentist
A legal challenge in Seattle pits established professionals against unlicensed practitioners as the state seeks to define medical standards.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
SEATTLE, Sept. 8. — Three dentists, convicted of practicing without a license, were given heavy fines by Judge Neal in the superior court yesterday morning. In each case an appeal was taken, and the constitutionality of the law under which the fines were imposed will now be determined in the supreme court of the state. H. C. Littooy was fined $200, as was also W. Newton. J. Harris, who was found guilty by a jury in the superior court some time ago but was recommended to the mercy of the court, was fined only $100 and costs. J. W. Brown, the man against whom the dental association is waging particular war, had sentence suspended pending the decision in the supreme court.
“The man against whom the dental association is waging particular war.”
Medical licensing is a perennial debate in Washington, balancing the need for public safety against the barriers to entry for practitioners. Today's debates over scope-of-practice for nurse practitioners and other health roles echo this 1904 dispute over who is permitted to perform clinical procedures.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.