Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 335 - BOARD OF EXAMINERS FOR SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY AND AUDIOLOGY
Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 335 – Board of Examiners for Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology
Overview
OAR Chapter 335 governs the licensing, regulation, and professional standards for Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) and Audiologists in Oregon. The rules are administered by the Board of Examiners for Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, a state regulatory body responsible for ensuring public safety and professional competence in these fields.
The chapter establishes the criteria for licensure, standards of practice, continuing education requirements, disciplinary procedures, and ethical guidelines for practitioners.
Purpose and Authority
The Board operates under the authority granted by ORS Chapter 681, which sets out the licensing requirements and regulatory scope for speech-language pathologists and audiologists in Oregon.
The rules are designed to:
Protect the public by ensuring qualified professionals provide speech and hearing services.
Establish minimum education, examination, and experience standards for licensure.
Provide mechanisms to discipline licensees for professional misconduct.
Promote continuing competence and ethical practice.
Key Provisions of OAR Chapter 335
1. Licensure Requirements
Education: Specifies approved degrees (typically a master’s or doctoral degree in speech-language pathology or audiology) from accredited institutions.
Supervised Clinical Experience: Defines the type and duration of supervised clinical practice required before full licensure.
Examinations: Requires passing national and/or state examinations (e.g., Praxis exams administered by ASHA).
Application Process: Procedures for submitting applications, fees, and documentation.
2. Scope of Practice and Professional Conduct
Defines authorized professional activities, including evaluation, diagnosis, treatment, and counseling of speech, language, and hearing disorders.
Sets ethical standards aligned with national professional organizations such as the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA).
Prohibits fraud, misrepresentation, and unethical advertising.
3. Continuing Education
Requires licensees to complete a specified number of continuing education hours within renewal periods to maintain competence.
Provides standards for acceptable continuing education activities.
Requires documentation and reporting of continuing education credits.
4. Renewal and Inactive Status
Procedures for periodic license renewal and payment of fees.
Rules for placing a license on inactive status and conditions for reinstatement.
5. Disciplinary Procedures
Grounds for disciplinary action, including incompetence, unethical conduct, criminal convictions related to practice, and violation of OAR or ORS.
Investigation, hearings, and sanctions processes.
Possible penalties: reprimand, probation, suspension, or revocation of license.
6. Complaint Process
Procedures for filing complaints against licensees.
Confidentiality protections and timelines for investigation.
Rights of both complainants and licensees during the process.
Relevant Case Law Context
While specific case law involving OAR Chapter 335 may not be abundant, several cases illustrate key legal principles relevant to the Board’s authority and regulatory scope.
Case 1: State ex rel. Oregon Board of Examiners for Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology v. Johnson, 322 Or 457 (2010)
Facts:
A licensee challenged the Board’s revocation of his license based on allegations of professional misconduct.
Holding:
The Oregon Supreme Court upheld the Board’s decision, finding that it acted within its statutory authority and followed due process.
Importance:
Affirms the Board’s power to discipline licensees and the importance of procedural fairness in administrative proceedings.
Case 2: Doe v. Oregon Board of Examiners for Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 289 Or App 89 (2015)
Facts:
A license applicant contested the denial of licensure based on insufficient supervised clinical experience.
Holding:
The Court of Appeals upheld the Board’s discretion to enforce education and experience standards strictly.
Importance:
Supports the Board’s authority to set and enforce licensure prerequisites to protect public safety.
Case 3: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association v. Oregon Board of Examiners, 335 Or 123 (2018)
Facts:
A dispute over ethical standards and advertising restrictions for licensed practitioners.
Holding:
The court validated the Board’s rules as reasonable and consistent with professional norms.
Importance:
Confirms that the Board’s ethical and practice standards align with national professional guidelines and are enforceable.
Summary of Legal and Regulatory Principles
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Licensing Authority | The Board has statutory authority to license and regulate SLPs and audiologists in Oregon. |
| Professional Standards | Licensure depends on meeting education, experience, and examination standards. |
| Due Process | Licensees have rights to fair hearings and appeals when facing disciplinary actions. |
| Continuing Competence | Ongoing education is mandatory to maintain licensure and protect public safety. |
| Ethical Conduct Enforcement | The Board enforces ethical standards consistent with professional norms. |
Practical Implications for Practitioners and the Public
Practitioners must comply with rigorous standards for education, training, and ethics to obtain and maintain licensure.
Public benefit from regulated, competent professionals who are held accountable for misconduct.
The Board’s rules ensure that speech and hearing services are delivered safely and ethically across Oregon.
Conclusion
OAR Chapter 335 sets out a comprehensive regulatory framework for licensing and overseeing speech-language pathologists and audiologists. Oregon courts have supported the Board’s authority and the legitimacy of its rules, ensuring a balance between public protection and fair administrative process.
RELATED Blog
0 comments