This bill would require certain licensed health care professionals in New York to give written notice to current and new patients when the provider is practicing under a probationary order issued after January 1, 2026. The disclosure would have to identify the provider’s probationary status, the reasons for probation as reflected in the administrative record, the length of the probation and end date, any practice restrictions, and contact information for the relevant state board. The bill applies to a broad range of professions, including physicians, physician assistants, chiropractors, dentists, dental hygienists, perfusionists, physical therapists, nurses, midwives, podiatrists, optometrists, massage therapists, occupational therapists, acupuncturists, and respiratory therapists.
The notice must be provided before the patient’s first visit following the probation order, and in some cases may be provided by the hospital or practice where the appointment occurs rather than the individual licensee. Patients, guardians, or health care surrogates must also sign a receipt acknowledging the disclosure and indicating how to find more information online. If a patient cancels after receiving the notice, neither the patient nor the patient’s insurer may be charged for the appointment. The bill also sets a civil penalty of up to $2,000 for violations and authorizes license suspension for subsequent willful violations.
The bill’s impact on state law would be to add a new disclosure requirement to the Education Law governing professional licensing and discipline. It would expand the obligations of the Department of Education and the applicable state boards to ensure probationary status is communicated to patients in specified circumstances, and it would create enforcement consequences for noncompliance. In practical terms, the measure affects licensed health care providers under multiple professional articles, as well as hospitals and practices that host appointments for probationary licensees.
General sentiment from the available materials appears to be neutral to supportive in concept, though there is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided context. The bill is framed as a patient-notification and transparency measure, suggesting an intent to inform patients about disciplinary status before treatment begins. Because no transcripts or votes are available, there is no documented opposition or endorsement in the record provided.
The main points of contention likely concern patient privacy, the breadth of the disclosure requirement, and the administrative burden on providers and practices. The bill requires disclosure of the cause for probation in the statement of issues or legal conclusions, which could be viewed as potentially stigmatizing or beyond a simple status notice. It also applies in a wide range of circumstances, including cases involving alleged negligence, felony convictions tied to patient care, cognitive impairment, sexual misconduct-related monitoring, incomplete probationary training, and repeat probation, which may raise questions about due process, fairness, and how much detail patients should receive.
The bill would amend the Education Law by adding a new section requiring specified licensed health care professionals to disclose probationary status and related disciplinary information to patients under defined conditions. It would impose new duties on the Department of Education, state professional boards, licensees, and in some cases hospitals or practices, while also creating penalties for noncompliance and a right for patients to cancel without charge after receiving the disclosure.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented legislative debate to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be presented as a consumer-protection and transparency bill aimed at informing patients about provider discipline before care is rendered.
Likely areas of contention include whether patients should receive detailed reasons for probation versus a simpler notice of disciplinary status, whether the bill unduly burdens providers and facilities with disclosure and receipt requirements, and whether it could discourage patients from seeking care from otherwise qualified professionals. The inclusion of sensitive grounds such as mental illness, cognitive impairment, sexual misconduct monitoring, and repeated probation may also raise privacy, stigma, and due-process concerns among affected licensees and professional groups.