I refer to the report, "Dentists’ group says proposed dental care framework was not meaningfully discussed" (May 28).

Based on the report, there was no formal process to engage the dental fraternity until very late in the development of the framework, which was formulated in response to the rising number of complaints lodged with the Singapore Dental Association (SDA) and Singapore Dental Council (SDC).

The SDA is the professional body for dentists in Singapore, while the SDC is the self-regulatory body for the dental profession.

I understand that most of the complaints were due to communication breakdowns, or patients’ frustration with mismatches between treatment or service expectations and the outcomes.  

These stem from a perceived lack of soft skills, rather than clinical skills.

Further legislation and more technical training are thus unlikely to resolve these issues.

Also, restricting certification to selected local providers will reduce the scope of training available.

Right now, dentists are free to pursue professional development based on their interests by learning from the best globally.

Since Singapore has a small dental community, it is more difficult to encourage such speakers to conduct courses here.

Restricting the available continuing-education programmes may result in Singapore’s dentists being left behind, especially as the latest advances continue further afield.

There are other areas of clinical practice, such as infection control standards and clinical staff training, that are more critical to ensuring that Singapore dentistry is in line with global standards.

All dentists know the consequences of breaching ethical guidelines. Legislating matters of professionalism has no utility.

ABOUT THE WRITER:

Dr Jaclyn Toh Ai Lin is a general dentist in private practice.