New policy directions from the COAG Health Council say the first duty of AHPRA and the national boards is protecting the public and patient safety
New policy directions from the COAG Health Council say the first duty of AHPRA and the national boards is protecting the public and patient safety, and that “the need for effective deterrence must outweigh consideration of the potential impacts upon the practitioner” when considering sanctions.
The first direction says the bodies must take into account the potential impact of the practitioner’s conduct on the public, “including vulnerable people such as children, the aged, those living with disability and people who are the potential targets of family and domestic violence; and consider the extent to which deterring other practitioners from participating in similar conduct would support the protection of the public and engender confidence in the regulated profession”.
It says “the risk that the practitioner poses to the public and the need for effective deterrence must outweigh consideration of the potential impacts upon the practitioner from any regulatory action”.
It also authorises informing a practitioner’s colleagues, employers and health departments when they have been referred to a tribunal or are being investigated for potential unprofessional conduct or misconduct.
The second requires boards to consult with patient safety bodies and consumer bodies when developing or revising registration standards, codes and guidelines; to consider their impact on vulnerable members of the community and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; and to prepare and publish a “patient health and safety impact statement” each time.
AHPRA CEO Martin Fletcher said while public protection and consultation had always been key considerations when administering the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme, “these guidelines clearly articulate what National Boards and AHPRA need to take into account when determining whether to take regulatory action regarding a health practitioner or when developing or revising registration standards, codes and guidelines”.
When The Medical Republic asked what incident or pressure had prompted this, an AHPRA representative said: “Health ministers and their departments have been undertaking work to amend the National Law to strengthen public protection and ensure the effective operation of the National Scheme” and that ministers had agreed to issue the policy directions “in support of reforms to improve public protection”.
Asked whether health practitioners had any grounds to fear that the weight of regulation or judgment would shift against them, the representative said AHPRA and the boards would “continue to ensure fairness for health practitioners in our regulatory processes”.
“For the 1.7% of practitioners with notifications made about them, these directions provide a clear mandate to consider the potential impact of a practitioner’s conduct on the public, including vulnerable people in the community, when determining whether to take regulatory action.”
AMA President, Dr Tony Bartone, said that the AMA has supported a National Registration and Accreditation Scheme that is focused on patient safety, as well as doctor safety.
“It is very unfortunate that there was not a public and transparent consultation on these particular reforms with the whole medical profession, but the AMA stands ready to work closely with the Medical Board and AHPRA to ensure these policy directions produce the best possible outcomes for patients and for doctors.
“Being a doctor is a stressful vocation. We deal with life-and-death situations every day. We are only human, and our work takes its toll.
“We need to know that the regulator that monitors us each and every year is taking an informed and appropriately balanced approach, and that each case is considered on the evidence and not just perception.
“We need consistent laws based in evidence to ensure that all doctors and medical students can have the utmost confidence in the regulator. It will be important that these new policy directions do not conflate public expectations with real evidence and best practice medicine.
“The overwhelming majority of doctors are exemplary. This is reflected in the everyday care of their patients, and why medical practitioners are consistently rated as one of the most trustworthy professions.”
The policy directions can be found at ahpra.gov.au/about under Ministerial Directives and Communiques.
