I understand the puropse of the BOD to protect the citizens and hold the profession to the highest esteem  and standards. However, at what cost? I understand that it is valuable to know the law and practice with a code of ethics. Like everyone else said, 99% of us do this because we are dental clinicians and have succeeded in our profession because we adhere to a self-chosen moral code that was not imposed on us. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for not following it. However, will this exam teach us everything we need to know about the law so we do not violate it. I don't think so. I think a more impactful way of keeping us informed of the law is to inform us, not take a test with limited scope. I think there are many uncertians about this exam. All we know it is a manditory 3 year exam. We know nothing about the details. How can we support any regulation that has no framework? That, in and of itself, is unethical to decide such a law without knowing the details and plan for implementation. I know that other states require this. Has unlawful behavior decreased since imposing a jurisprudence exam? What is the science behind it? I agree with other comments about requiring some sort of jurisprudence CE as apart of our re-licencing requirement. I think the science has shown that a test does not prove anything. However, encouraging continuing education fosters an educated profession. For example, as a board certified pediatric dentist, I am required to take 15 hours of CE specifically regarding pediatric clinical care and not practice managment or ergonomics because excellence in pediatric clinical care is what makes me a pediatric dentist.  I urge the BOD to mandate requirements that are impactful, not just hoops to jump through like SOL exams. We are not in primary school anymore we are doctors.