Optician Licensing

[Boowank]

I was surprised to see that there was no licensing or certification of opticians in many states, including mine. I consider eyeglasses to be medical devices and I figured the people who build and service medical devices would have some kind of licensing. I <i>think</i> radiology technicians are licensed.

But what surprised me even more is that it seems many of the opticians on this board want licenesesure and regulation in their states. Most industries want less or no regulation on them. So why would an optician want more government to be regulated and licensed?

[Ory]

Any time you've spent a significant amount of time earning a designation, you get a little miffed when some highschool dropout sets up shop down the road and claims to be the same as you.

In my mind, regulations do 2 things. They protect the consumer from undereducated salespeople, and they maintain some exclusivity. Obviously point one is in your favour. Point two helps to keep prices in a reasonable range that the educated optician can charge enough to make their education worthwhile.

Occasionally the regulations become a tad excessive (such as those on optometrists in Ontario...but that's another story) but in general they're good for everyone.

[ziggy]

Boo,I have found that like you, most consumers assume that the "optician" with whom your dealing is certified/licensed. That is not the case in HALF of the states.In those states any one with enough credit to frames and lens can set up shop and sell YOU glasses. I challange you to tell your friends/family and start asking for certified opticians and dont settle for less. Also contact you state rep and voice your concerns they will listen to you.

[Cindy K]

Before we had licensing in BC, we had people pumping gas one day or making pizzas, and selling glasses and contacts the next. Hmmmm, wonder where the price wars and 2-or-3-for-1 concept originated?

[Karlen McLean]

Many states have tried for licensure and failed in the not-so-distant past. One thing pointed out by legislators, lobbyists, and lawyers is that there is no proof of harm to consumer's eyes by utilizing non-licensed personnel. There's little if no record of harm to public health, safety, and welfare in licensed or unlicensed states.

There are more litigations involving eyewear/vision than you may think. The great majority are settled out of court and the records are sealed. Which means that those in favor of licensure can't use that information to prove harm.

One suggested way to obtain licensure is for unlicensed states to form a proactive petition drive, signed by consumers who want licensed opticians taking care of them. Your state association can perhaps help organize that. This could also be an effective tool in licensed states that may be going through sunset/review.

[Boowank]

I actually did go to the website of the American Board of Opticianry (I think that's the name, I found it on here). What dissapointed me was that they didn't have any kind of search function for the consumer to find an optician who went through the certification. I would have liked to find a list of people in my area and what shop they worked at. Otherwise I just have to plug random stuff into Google until I find something.

I've read that poor glasses won't physically wreck your eyes, so that may be the idea behind lack of eye harm. But it can really mess up your quality of life. Poorly made glasses will make it harder to read and make it way more likely that you'll get in a car wreck because you couldn't see properly.

I guess I don't see why the guy that does the eye exam is regulated and the guy that makes the glasses isn't....