California Law and Ethics practice questions: Patient care

Answer B: A PMS permit, a GA permit, or a pediatric-endorsed MS permit issued under §1647.31(a).

for a patient under 13, even minimal sedation requires a Board sedation permit — PMS (Pediatric Minimal Sedation) is the dedicated permit, and a GA permit or an MS permit with the pediatric endorsement also qualifies under BPC §1647.31(a).

Common trap: PMS expands to Pediatric Minimal Sedation — "Pediatric Moderate Sedation" is a wrong expansion that stale prep repeats, and the adult no-permit rule does not extend below age 13.

Source: California Business & Professions Code §1647.31 — minimal sedation of a patient under age 13; PMS, GA, or pediatric-endorsed MS permit required

Answer C: Consult CURES within 24 hours before prescribing, then recheck every 6 months.

CURES must be consulted within 24 hours or on the previous business day before first prescribing a Schedule II-IV controlled substance, with rechecks at least every 6 months while the drug remains in the treatment plan; Schedule V is excluded from the mandatory consultation.

Common trap: stale prep teaches 4-month rechecks or after-the-fact checks — the rule is 24-hours-before plus 6-month rechecks.

Source: Department of Consumer Affairs CURES overview

Answer A: The online-only BLS certificate is not acceptable; a hands-on skills course is required.

the mandatory CE core is 50 units with 2 DPA, 2 infection control, 2 California opioid (16 CCR §1016), plus a current Basic Life Support course that includes a live, in-person skills practice session, a skills test, and a written examination — online-only BLS is not accepted.

Common trap: older "2-2-2" summaries omit the hands-on BLS core course; the repeating state opioid course is also distinct from the one-time federal MATE training.

Source: Dental Board of California — continuing education, renewal, and permit-maintenance guidance (50-unit cycle; hands-on BLS requirement)

Answer B: The adult child (the son), who is the appropriate default surrogate under the AB 2338 framework.

Assembly Bill 2338 (Probate Code §§4711–4712) added a default-surrogate framework that follows specified family priorities when no advance directive, designated agent, or conservator exists. Under that framework, a close family member such as an adult child is the appropriate lawful surrogate here, while a nephew is a more remote relative.

Common trap: Assuming the dentist can bypass the family entirely using the "emergency exception," which is invalid here because a legally recognized surrogate (the adult child) is reasonably available to provide consent — or assuming a court conservatorship is required before any emergency dental care.

Source: Probate Code sections 4683, 4711, and 4712 plus AB 2338 surrogate decisionmaker framework for adults lacking capacity

Answer B: The dentist must immediately halt the examination and defer to the mother's wishes.

Under Family Code section 6550, while a properly completed Caregiver's Authorization Affidavit protects the provider from liability for good-faith reliance, the legal authority of a parent instantly overrides the caregiver's consent if the parent expresses contrary wishes.

Common trap: Believing the statutory affidavit acts as a legally binding contract that cannot be verbally revoked, or assuming that safely stopping a mid-stream exam constitutes "patient abandonment."

Source: Family Code section 6550 Caregiver's Authorization Affidavit for relative caregivers authorizing minor medical and dental care