Australians were recently urged to reject the potential expansion of optometrists’ prescribing powers during a national public consultation that closed on 24 December 2025.
The call came after the Optometry Board of Australia (OBA) proposed allowing optometrists to independently prescribe from a list of approved systemic medicines, including antibiotics, antivirals and anti-inflammatory drugs. In response, the Australian Society of Ophthalmologists (ASO) publicly opposed the move, encouraging Australians to say no.
ASO said the risks would outweigh the benefits, were the OBA’s proposal to go ahead, labelling it “a defining moment for patient safety in Australia”. ASO vice chair Kerry Gallagher said, “While optometrists can learn pharmacology and therapeutics in the classroom, they do not receive the depth of clinical training that underpins safe decision-making in acute eye disease.”
ASO rejected arguments that Australia should adopt prescribing models from New Zealand, the US or the UK, arguing that as “one of the safest in the world” Australia’s health system didn’t get there by “cutting corners on patient safety”. In response, Optometry Australia (OA) said therapeutic endorsement does not cut corners and is not solely classroom-based. “Claims that enabling therapeutically endorsed optometrists to prescribe oral medicines poses a risk to patient safety are not supported by evidence,” it said.
In New Zealand, optometrists have prescribed oral medicines for eye conditions within scope for more than a decade. “Evidence from that jurisdiction shows optometrists prescribe conservatively and appropriately, without evidence of mis-prescribing or patient harm,” OA said.
