First, I sincerely apologize for misstating the name of the American Association of Women Dentists.
While I understand the issues raised by Dr. De La Rosa, the crux of our differences lies in a distinction between organizations representing groups of dentists with common interests and an organization representing the dental profession.
Nothing in my article should be construed as being opposed to special-interest organizations, be they based on ethnicity, race, sex or clinical discipline. Quite contrary, I have urged the ADA to "seek ways to support and enhance their agendas."
It is not the presence of other national organizations per se that concerns me. Rather, it is the prospect that their members will not see themselves as having interests that are best represented by the ADA, and the ADA will not become the diverse organization it needs to be.
As dentistry is increasingly subject to the impact of public policy, it is imperative that our profession has a single organization that can speak for the overwhelming majority of dentists. This has been the case for over 100 years, to the great benefit of our profession. Special-interest organizations and the ADA can coexist, but not without a mutual understanding that both serve essential functions and both must be supported.
Dr. De La Rosa’s thoughtful letter provides ample evidence that there is a need for an enhanced dialogue.
