Rest assured that your parking tickets probably won’t cost your medical registration.
AHPRA’s draft revised criminal history standards provide a higher level of detail on what to expect on registration, but it will still be mandatory in some states to report minor traffic violations.
Work on the revised standards kicked off late last year, with the draft released in early June.
The changes themselves are mainly cosmetic; the definitions of what counts as a crime is set by each individual state and territory, and the regulator doesn’t have a say in that.
Which is why doctors in Tasmania who receive a speeding or parking fine and doctors in WA who have been convicted for unpaid parking fines will still have to declare this to Ahpra when registering or reregistering.
Doctors in Queensland who have pleaded guilty to an offence charge and were found guilty without conviction also have to tell the regulator about it.
But, as AHPRA’s revised draft standards and explanatory material make clear, it’s unlikely that a minor parking offence would be considered grounds to limit registration.
“Generally, the Board will place less or no weight on offences appearing on a criminal history that have been decriminalised since the health practitioner committed, or allegedly committed, the offence,” the draft guide to the application of the new standard reads.
“In particular no weight is placed on offences where there is no uniformity about the particular offence across states and territories, for example marijuana offences.”
Decisions are made on a case-by-case basis; there may be some scenarios in which a doctor’s registration is impacted because of the circumstances in which they committed an offence, even if that offence is minor.
“Usually, the nature of the offence or alleged offence is closely related to the gravity, or seriousness of the offence or alleged offence,” the draft standards read.
“However, some offences may not be ‘serious’ criminal offences but will be of a nature that relates strongly to health practice and will impact on suitability to hold registration or to practise the profession.”
A new note added to the standards states that the most important considerations will be the protection of the public and the public’s confidence in the safety of registered health practitioners.
Related
There are two more additions: a recognition that First Nations people may have a criminal history arising from racism and inequitable treatment under the law, and an acknowledgement that not all applicants with criminal history are refused registration.
In its submission to the board, the RACGP was broadly supportive of the draft standards and accompanying documents.
“Members observed the new explanatory material as thorough, clearly structured and adding substantial value in elucidating the standard,” the RACGP’s submission read.
“The use of concrete examples to accompany each factor brings the considerations to life and will aid practitioner comprehension.”
It did, however, ask for more detail on doctors who are convicted for protesting on health-related issues like climate change and refugee detention.
“Health professionals who are vocal on matters shown to be harming community and population health may face increased contact with law enforcement and changes to the law that criminalise protest will increase potential criminal consequences,” the college said.
“Their registration is therefore placed at risk when they are no risk to the public.”
The RACGP also asked for more de-identified examples to be included on “grey area” scenarios like lower-level substance offences, public order offences and crimes arising from mental health crises.
