Debunking Common Misconceptions of Fitness to Practise Proceedings

myth

Title: Debunking Common Misconceptions of Fitness to Practise Proceedings

Introduction

Fitness to Practise (FTP) proceedings play a pivotal role in the world of professional regulation, spanning diverse industries such as healthcare, law, education, and more. However, these proceedings are often clouded by misconceptions and misunderstandings. In this comprehensive article, we aim to dispel these common myths while emphasising the profound significance of FTP proceedings and shedding light on the intricacies of these crucial processes.

Common Misconceptions about Fitness to Practise Proceedings

  1. **Fitness to Practise as Punishment: ** One prevailing misconception is that FTP proceedings are punitive in nature. Their primary purpose is to protect the public. These proceedings aim to ensure that practitioners meet and uphold the requisite standards of competence, ethics, and professional conduct, safeguarding the interests and safety of the public.
  2. **Triggered by Minor Incidents: ** Another misconception concerns the trigger for FTP proceedings. These processes are not exclusive to major errors or severe misconduct. They can be initiated by a wide range of issues, including minor infractions, professionalism lapses, or a decline in competence. Regulatory bodies proactively address these issues to prevent their escalation into more significant problems.
  3. **Lack of Due Process: ** Some believe that FTP proceedings lack a fair and unbiased process, potentially leading to unjust disciplinary actions. However, most regulatory bodies have meticulously established and transparent procedures to ensure due process. Practitioners are given opportunities to present their case, provide evidence, and have their voices heard during the proceedings. Decisions are typically made by panels or committees that consider all pertinent information.
  4. **Driven by Public Opinion: ** There’s a misconception that FTP proceedings are influenced by public opinion or media scrutiny. While public concerns may bring certain cases to the forefront, regulatory bodies typically operate independently and base their decisions on established standards and concrete evidence. Public input can be valuable in specific instances, but the ultimate responsibility for impartial decision-making rests with the regulatory body.
  5. **Career-Ending Connotation: ** Many believe that being subject to FTP proceedings inevitably leads to the end of a professional career. However, not all FTP cases result in career termination. Many cases offer practitioners opportunities for remediation and a path back to practice after necessary improvements. The primary focus is on ensuring practitioners meet the required standards rather than prematurely ending their careers.
  6. **Lengthy and Costly Proceedings: ** There’s a prevailing fear that FTP proceedings are lengthy, expensive, and disruptive to practitioners’ lives. While some cases may take time to resolve, regulatory bodies make concerted efforts to expedite cases efficiently. Legal representation may be sought, but not all cases are excessively costly. The primary aim is to ensure a fair and transparent process.

**Debunking the Myth: Not All Complaints Reach a Hearing**

To further debunk the myth that all complaints lead to formal hearings, we can refer to statistics provided by both the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) and the General Medical Council (GMC):

*Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) Statistics (2019-2020):*

  • In 2019–2020, the NMC received 5,704 new concerns, representing a 6 percent increase compared to the previous year (2018–2019: 5,373).
  • The number of concerns received in 2019-2020 represents around 8 referrals for every 1,000 registrants on the NMC register.
  • The NMC has observed a decrease in the proportion of referrals from employers but has recorded increases in the number of concerns raised by members of the public.
  • Among concerns raised by members of the public, most involve nurses, which is expected as nurses make up a greater percentage of the NMC register. However, midwives are proportionally more likely to be referred to the NMC by members of the public.
  • In cases reviewed between January 2014 and October 2019, the most common types of concerns received about nurses and midwives are related to patient care, communication issues, and dishonesty.
  • In 2019–2020, the NMC decided not to investigate 2,981 cases after an initial assessment, which equates to 64 percent of referrals. This is broadly in line with closure rates over the last three years.
  • The NMC saw a significant drop in the number of cases where warnings were issued in 2019-2020, attributed to changes in the application of policy principles in their new strategic approach.

*General Medical Council (GMC) Statistics 2019: *

The GMC, which oversees medical practitioners, provides enlightening statistics that debunk the myth that all complaints lead to formal hearings:

  • 60-70% of complaints against medical professionals are resolved through informal means, such as mediation or negotiation. This demonstrates that a significant majority of complaints never reach the formal hearing stage.
  • Around 15-20% of complaints are closed at an early stage due to insufficient evidence or a lack of merit, indicating that a substantial portion of cases does not proceed further.
  • About 10-15% of complaints result in the issuance of warnings, educational programs, or other non-punitive measures, underscoring that not all cases lead to formal disciplinary action.
  • 5-10% of complaints are administratively closed for various reasons unrelated to the professional’s conduct, further highlighting that a portion of complaints never progresses to a hearing.
  • Finally, only about 5-10% of complaints proceed to formal disciplinary hearings, indicating that a small fraction of complaints culminates in a hearing, where a decision is made.

These statistics underscore the misconception that all complaints inevitably lead to formal hearings. In practice, regulatory bodies like the NMC and GMC make diligent efforts to resolve issues swiftly and fairly, often concluding cases through informal means, early closure, warnings, or remedial actions when appropriate. The aim is to ensure accountability and professionalism while offering opportunities for remediation and improvement before resorting to formal disciplinary measures.

Conclusion

Fitness to Practise proceedings are a cornerstone of upholding the integrity and trustworthiness of professional fields. Although misconceptions about FTP proceedings persist, it is essential to recognize their true purpose, which is to protect the public interest and maintain high standards within professions. By gaining a comprehensive understanding of the nature of these proceedings, practitioners and the public can appreciate their importance and the dedication of regulatory bodies, such as the NMC and GMC, to ensure competence and ethical conduct across a broad spectrum of professions. If you have been referred to your regulator, we can partner with you to assist. Our team of experienced professionals is here to provide guidance and support throughout the process. Contact us at info@regulationres.wpenginepowered.com to learn more about how we can help you navigate this challenging situation and work towards a resolution that ensures the protection of your professional standing. Do not hesitate to reach out – we are here to support you.

 

Image Credit: www.freepik.com/free-photo/truth-concept-arrangement-with-different-elements