Laboratory Update Information regarding MN Laboratory Personnel
Licensure January 9, 2009
Background Information In the 2007-2008 Minnesota legislative session a bill was
introduced which would require that laboratory professionals have a license to practice. This bill was drafted by the Minnesota
Laboratory Licensure Coalition, which is made up of representatives of laboratory professional organizations with members
in the state of Minnesota. The bill did not make it out of committee during the 2007 session, but had its first hearing in
the Senate in 2008.
This bill will be reintroduced in the January 2009 legislative session. The bill would require
laboratory professionals to have specific education, certification and annual documentation of continuing education. Upon
the effective date, all current practitioners, even if they do not possess all of the licensure requirements outlined in the
bill, would be grandfathered in and the new requirements would apply to “new practitioners” only.
In order to gain
a broader perspective on the opinion of the broader Minnesota laboratory community regarding licensure, the Laboratory Licensure
Coalition is circulating a survey. It is being sent to members of the professional societies, as well as all hospital laboratories
and many clinics in the state. The coalition is asking the contact person in each site to share it with their laboratory
employees in order to get as inclusive a response as possible. You may access the survey directly from this message by clicking
on the link below.
To submit the on-line survey Please click on the following link to submit the survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=YpA2cXCXO08GCbK_2fhNbyIQ_3d_3d
Laboratory Licensure:
The 2009 Legislative Journey
The Minnesota Laboratory Licensure Coalition made much progress during the 2009 legislative session. We worked with
a variety of stakeholders to modify the bill and saw forward progress in the legislative process. On April 1, the coalition
was informed by co-chairs Rick Panning and Kathy Hansen and lobbyist Vic Moore that the process would end for this year, the
first in a 2-year legislative session. Although it is disappointing to have to make a decision to not continue, it is
important to understand the progress that was made and to plan the next steps as we prepare for 2010.
