The following is a Counterpoint column:

By Paul J. Simel

It is with concern that I have read of the sudden interest in optometrist Jim Black, who has shown the influence of the optometric lobby by the passage of a law requiring each child entering school to have a comprehensive eye examination.

It is meritorious to test each child for common and not-so-common eye problems, but it surely is not cost-effective to do so in the manner required.

I spent my career as a physical ophthalmologist (M.D.) and eye surgeon and have watched the gradual inroads into traditional physician practice made by the optometric lobby. It has reached the point where eye surgery is now on the radar for optometric lobbying. This should be of greater concern for patients and physicians. There seems to be a lack of understanding when politicians determine credentials for medical and surgical procedures by relatively untrained optometrists.

Here is John Jones, M.D., four years of medical school and four years of residency in ocular medicine and surgery, and here is Ralph Smith, O.D., with none of the above. Who would you want doing the surgery and prescribing medication for your eye problem? (Prescribing medicine is a relatively recent optometric privilege and was first accomplished by optometric lobbying in Oklahoma and North Carolina.)

Although this new law for schoolchildren includes eye examinations by ophthalmologists as well as by optometrists, there is no suspicion that this was desired by ophthalmology.

There surely are better, more cost-effective ways to ensure eye health for youngsters than a hasty, ill-conceived law that infuriates many and leaves the medical community with an undeserved reputation. Of course, lobbying is legal, but passing this law by our representatives leaves me questioning their collective wisdom.
Optometrists lobbied for this law. Physicians did not.

The writer lives in Greensboro.