# Florida FDLR practice questions: Discipline

Five original Florida FDLR practice questions on discipline, each answered on this page with a rationale and a source.

Last updated: 2026-07-27.

## Question 1

A Florida-licensed practitioner realizes they have developed a substance abuse issue. They voluntarily self-refer to the state’s impaired practitioner consultant, sign a monitoring contract, and release their medical records. After several months of compliance, the practitioner stops attending mandatory sessions and is terminated from the program for material noncompliance. What is the immediate administrative consequence of this termination?

- A. The consultant must disclose the termination to the Department, and that disclosure constitutes a complaint for discipline.
- B. The Board must assess a mandatory $10,000 fine for failing to successfully complete a rehabilitative program.
- C. The consultant provides a notice of noncompliance giving the practitioner 15 days to re-enroll before notifying the Board.
- D. The practitioner's license is permanently revoked by operation of law due to inability to practice with skill and safety.

**Answer A:** The consultant must disclose the termination to the Department, and that disclosure constitutes a complaint for discipline.

Under s. 456.076(12)(b), F.S., when a participant is terminated for material noncompliance, inability to progress, or any reason other than completion, the consultant must disclose all information to the department, and such disclosure constitutes a complaint under s. 456.073. Termination for noncompliance is also a standalone ground under s. 456.072(1)(hh).

**Common trap:** Thinking the 15-day notice of noncompliance applies (that is only for initial minor violations) or that revocation is automatic (it requires due process).

Source: [s. 456.076, F.S. — Impaired practitioner programs](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0456/Sections/0456.076.html)

## Question 2

A Florida-licensed dentist serves as the dentist of record for a teledentistry company. For a new patient seeking clear aligners, the dentist reviews high-resolution intraoral photographs and a video conference with the patient, then authorizes treatment. The dentist never meets the patient in person. Under the 2024/2025 Florida statutes, has the dentist committed a disciplinable offense?

- A. No, because live video conferencing satisfies the requirement for a virtual in-person evaluation.
- B. No, provided the patient is also provided with a 24-hour emergency contact number for the dentist.
- C. Yes, because the dentist failed to perform a physical examination in the same room as the patient.
- D. Yes, but only if the patient experiences a clinical complication resulting from the lack of a physical exam.

**Answer C:** Yes, because the dentist failed to perform a physical examination in the same room as the patient.

Section 466.0281, F.S., requires — before initial orthodontic diagnosis or appliance use — an in-person examination or records from one within the previous 12 months, plus review of recent radiographs or equivalent bone imaging. The statute defines "in-person examination" as one conducted while the dentist is physically present in the same room as the patient; this new patient had neither an in-person exam nor prior in-person records.

**Common trap:** Assuming modern teledentistry/video conferencing is a legal substitute for physical presence in Florida for orthodontic starts.

Source: [s. 466.0281, F.S. — Initial examination for orthodontic appliance](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0466/Sections/0466.0281.html)

## Question 3

A dentist repeatedly makes explicit sexual propositions to the mother of a pediatric patient during the child's treatment visits. The mother is not a patient of the dentist. Is this conduct disciplinable under the Florida health professions statutes?

- A. No, because the sexual misconduct statutes only apply to the practitioner-patient relationship.
- B. No, as long as the dentist does not attempt to perform a clinical procedure on the mother.
- C. Yes, but only if the conduct occurs in a setting where the child patient is physically present.
- D. Yes, because sexual misconduct includes verbal activity toward a representative or family member of the patient.

**Answer D:** Yes, because sexual misconduct includes verbal activity toward a representative or family member of the patient.

Section 456.063(1), F.S., defines sexual misconduct in a health profession as using the relationship to induce or engage the patient or an immediate family member, guardian, or representative in verbal or physical sexual activity.

**Common trap:** Thinking the dentist-patient definition in s. 466.027 is the only one that applies; the all-professions definition in s. 456.063 is much broader.

Source: [s. 456.063, F.S. — Sexual misconduct; disqualification for license, certificate, or registration](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0456/Sections/0456.063.html)

## Question 4

A former patient files a formal complaint with the Department of Health alleging that a practitioner committed sexual battery during a procedure eight years ago. The practitioner moves to dismiss the complaint, citing the standard 6-year statute of limitations for administrative disciplinary actions. How will the Board likely rule?

- A. The Board will dismiss the complaint because the incident occurred more than six years prior to the filing.
- B. The Board will allow the complaint because there is no time bar for incidents involving sexual misconduct.
- C. The Board will allow the complaint only if the patient can prove that fraud prevented earlier discovery of the act.
- D. The Board will dismiss the complaint because administrative complaints are strictly capped at a 5-year window.

**Answer B:** The Board will allow the complaint because there is no time bar for incidents involving sexual misconduct.

Section 456.073(13), F.S., states that the 6-year limitation on filing an administrative complaint does not apply to criminal actions, diversion of controlled substances, sexual misconduct, or impairment.

**Common trap:** Assuming the 6-year (or 12-year fraud extension) limits are absolute for all types of conduct.

Source: [s. 456.073, F.S. — Disciplinary proceedings](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0456/Sections/0456.073.html)

## Question 5

A Florida dentist is found guilty of delegating the placement and carving of a permanent amalgam restoration to a dental assistant who has not completed the required expanded-functions training. According to the Board’s disciplinary guidelines and statutes, what is the mandatory minimum penalty for this first offense?

- A. A minimum 6-month licensure suspension.
- B. A $10,000 fine and permanent revocation.
- C. A letter of concern and 2 hours of remedial education.
- D. A $250 citation fine for delegating to an unqualified person.

**Answer A:** A minimum 6-month licensure suspension.

Section 466.028(3), F.S., mandates a minimum 6-month suspension for a dentist convicted of the delegation ground, s. 466.028(1)(z), and the guideline grid in 64B5-13.005(1) repeats the floor: any violation of s. 466.028(1)(z) results in a minimum licensure suspension of six months, except where revocation is imposed.

**Common trap:** Looking for a fine-only citation for what seems like a technical delegation error.

Source: [s. 466.028, F.S. — Grounds for disciplinary action; action by the board](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0466/Sections/0466.028.html)

## Next step

[Take the free 15-question FDLR practice test](https://dentovio.com/florida-dental-laws-rules/free-practice-test)

Official reference: [Chapter 466, Florida Statutes — Dentistry, Dental Hygiene, and Dental Laboratories](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0466/0466.html). Original exam-style questions written for study, never recalled exam content. Independent educational preparation, not legal advice, and not affiliated with or endorsed by the Florida Board of Dentistry. Confirm current requirements with the Board.