Council or Board notification · All 18 responsible authorities

Fitness to Practise for Healthcare Professionals for Health Practitioners facing a Council or Board investigation, complaint or allegation

Facing a concern about your fitness to practise? The course that sets out what fitness to practise is, and how to ensure it.

Competence — a diagnosis, a treatment or a patient’s safety questioned
Dishonesty — a record, a claim, a declaration or an account that is not true
Boundaries — a boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague
Confidentiality — patient information shared, seen or sent wrongly
Behaviour — rude, dismissive or disrespectful to a patient or a colleague
Health — a condition that may affect safe practice
Systems — a team or system failure you were part of
Any other — notification, complaint or allegation before your authority

Facing a Council or Board notification, a competence review, a health process, a Professional Conduct Committee or the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal — and want the whole process in one place?

Help with a Council or Board investigation, complaint or allegation starts here. This CPD course helps you remediate — and demonstrate the remediation, with a dated certificate for your written response, your portfolio or a Committee or Tribunal direction.

Buy this course — NZ$200 Bulk buy — any five or ten courses

Immediate access · certificate on completion · twelve months' access

2 CPD hours
Self-paced
Every registered profession
CPD certificate
Bulk buy: any 5 for NZ$850 · any 10 for NZ$1,400

At a glance

Who it is for: Any registered practitioner who has received a letter from their Council or Board, the Health and Disability Commissioner, a competence reviewer, a Professional Conduct Committee or the Tribunal about a concern regarding their fitness to practise
Authorities covered: All 18 responsible authorities under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003, their Professional Conduct Committees and the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal
Length: 10 sections, 54 lessons, 2 CPD hours
Format: Self-paced, online, immediate access, twelve months from purchase
Certificate: Issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses on completion, dated, with the course title and 2 CPD hours
Price: NZ$200 · any 5 for NZ$850 · any 10 for NZ$1,400

Certificate issued by Healthcare Ethics CoursesRemediation courses for regulatory processes.

2CPD hours, issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses

10Sections, nine closing with a reflective quiz

52Lessons, plus a post-course assessment

NZ$200One off. Twelve months' access

Who this course is for

You have received your first letter and need to remediate

The letter names a section of the Act, a route and a date, and asks for your response. The course sets out what fitness to practise means under the Act, which route your matter is on, what each reader decides, and the remediation they look for — reflection, insight and evidence of change, dated. The course to take first, and the one the other remediation courses on this site build on.

The concern is one of the seven triggers

Clinical competence, dishonesty, boundaries, confidentiality, behaviour and communication, health, or a systems failure. The course gives each its own lesson — what the authorities see, which route it takes, and what the response needs — and there is a specific course for each on this site.

A competence review, a health process or a Committee is under way

The route is decided and the reviewers, the committee or the Committee have written. The course sets out what each assesses, what a weak response looks like to them and what a strong one contains, and the three things every reader weighs: reflection, insight and remediation.

A Tribunal hearing is ahead

A charge has been laid and a hearing is listed. The course’s section on professionalism at hearings covers behaviour, communication and the presentation of evidence, the conduct the Tribunal’s decisions say weakens a case, and the portfolio that supports a penalty submission.

You are returning to practice, or under conditions

Conditions on your practising certificate, a supervision requirement, a competence programme, a return after suspension. The course covers the portfolio a review reads — reflective statements, CPD, audit, supervision reports, feedback — and fitness to practise as a habit the authorities can see.

A complaint with the Health and Disability Commissioner

A complaint about a patient’s care goes to the Commissioner first, and your Council or Board can act on public safety meanwhile. The Commissioner’s usual recommendations — an apology, an audit repeated after an interval, a written reflection, training — are the remediation this course is built for.

The seven triggers this course speaks to

Clinical competence and patient safety

A diagnosis missed, a deterioration not recognised, a medication error, practice beyond scope, a result not followed up. Inadequate treatment, delay, missed diagnosis and inadequate assessment are the Commissioner’s most frequent primary complaint issues, and clinical skills and knowledge led the concerns notified to the Medical Council in 2024/25. The competence route: a review, then a programme, conditions or supervision.

Probity and an allegation of dishonesty

A record altered, a claim for care not given, a false declaration, an account that changed, a lie to the authority. The conduct route, and the trigger the Tribunal treats as going to registration itself, because registration rests on honesty; the course explains why a probity concern is answered differently from a clinical one.

Professional and ethical boundaries

A relationship with a patient, a gift, a message after hours, harassment of a colleague, a dual role undeclared. The conduct route, and every authority places the responsibility for the boundary with the practitioner; the Tribunal has cancelled registrations for boundary breaches across the professions.

Confidentiality

A record opened without a reason, information shared beyond the team or with a relative, an email misdirected, a post. The conduct route, with the Privacy Act and the Health Information Privacy Code alongside; the Tribunal has suspended a nurse for records opened without a reason.

Professional behaviour and communication

A patient or whānau spoken to badly, a colleague humiliated, a complaint answered defensively, conduct online. Communication was 32% of the concerns notified to the Medical Council in 2024/25; competence where it is a skill below the standard, conduct where it is disrespect or dishonesty.

Health, fitness and the risk to patients

A mental or physical condition that may affect safe practice, declared or found. The health route, separate from conduct: a medical examination the authority may require, conditions or suspension while unable to practise, and support — and a declaration made first is read as a professional strength.

Systems awareness and team failures

A system that failed, a team that did not escalate, an unsafe process not declined, a colleague not challenged. The trigger practitioners least expect: the authorities read for what the individual saw and did within the system, and the course treats accountability within a team as its own question.

Any of the seven, answered weakly

Denial, excuses, blame, a vague reflection, a promise where evidence should be, an account that changes, the acknowledgement followed by “but”. A weak response is itself read as a concern about recurrence; the course’s fourth section sets weak and strong responses side by side with case comparisons.

Facing a Council or Board investigation, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.

Buy this course — NZ$200

What the course covers

Ten sections and 54 lessons, with a reflective quiz closing each of the first nine and a post-course assessment at the end.

Section 01

Introduction — What Does Fitness to Practise Mean in New Zealand Healthcare?

Four lessons

Section 02

Regulator Perspectives — MCNZ, NCNZ, Pharmacy Council, Dental Council, HPCA Authorities

Six lessons

Section 03

Common Triggers for Fitness-to-Practise Investigations

Seven lessons

Section 04

Weak vs Strong Responses to Concerns

Four lessons

Section 05

Reflection, Insight, and Remediation in Fitness-to-Practise Cases

Six lessons

Section 06

Building Fitness-to-Practise Portfolios — CPD, Audits, Supervision, Feedback

Eight lessons

Section 07

Case Studies — Cross-Profession Examples from New Zealand Healthcare

Six lessons

Section 08

Professionalism at Hearings — Behaviour, Communication, Presentation

Six lessons

Section 09

Embedding Fitness to Practise into Identity and Lifelong Standards

Five lessons

Section 10

Conclusion and Key Takeaways

Key takeaways and the post-course assessment

Show every lesson title

Section 01 · Introduction — What Does Fitness to Practise Mean in New Zealand Healthcare?: What Fitness to Practise Means; Why Fitness to Practise Matters for Patients; Why Fitness to Practise Matters for Regulators; Fitness to Practise as a Lifelong Standard.
Section 02 · Regulator Perspectives — MCNZ, NCNZ, Pharmacy Council, Dental Council, HPCA Authorities: Medical Council of New Zealand (MCNZ); Nursing Council of New Zealand (NCNZ); Pharmacy Council of New Zealand; Dental Council of New Zealand; HPCA Authorities — Allied Health Professions; Shared Themes Across Regulators.
Section 03 · Common Triggers for Fitness-to-Practise Investigations: Clinical Competence and Patient Safety; Probity and Honesty; Professional Boundaries; Confidentiality Breaches; Professional Behaviour and Communication; Health and Substance Misuse; Systems Awareness and Team Failures.
Section 04 · Weak vs Strong Responses to Concerns: Features of Weak Responses; Features of Strong Responses; Case Comparisons; Why Responses Matter.
Section 05 · Reflection, Insight, and Remediation in Fitness-to-Practise Cases: Reflection — Looking Back Honestly and Analytically; Insight — Understanding Why the Lapse Mattered; Remediation — Taking Concrete, Verifiable Action; How Reflection, Insight, and Remediation Interconnect; Regulator Expectations Across Professions; Practical Tips for Professionals.
Section 06 · Building Fitness-to-Practise Portfolios — CPD, Audits, Supervision, Feedback: Purpose of a Fitness-to-Practise Portfolio; Reflective Statements; Continuing Professional Development (CPD); Clinical or Administrative Audits; Supervision or Mentorship; Patient and Colleague Feedback; Integration of Evidence; Practical Tips for Building Portfolios.
Section 07 · Case Studies — Cross-Profession Examples from New Zealand Healthcare: Medicine — Prescribing Safety; Nursing — Documentation Integrity; Pharmacy — Probity and Honesty; Dentistry — Consent and Transparency; Allied Health — Boundary Management; Shared Lessons Across Professions.
Section 08 · Professionalism at Hearings — Behaviour, Communication, Presentation: Behaviour at Hearings; Communication at Hearings; Presentation of Evidence; Conduct That Weakens a Case; Conduct That Strengthens a Case; Practical Tips for Hearings.
Section 09 · Embedding Fitness to Practise into Identity and Lifelong Standards: Fitness to Practise as Professional Identity; Daily Habits that Maintain Fitness; Mentorship and Role Modelling; Resilience and Sustainability; Fitness Across a Career.
Section 10 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways: Conclusion; Key Takeaways.

How to respond to a Council or Board notification, complaint or allegation

Every reader on every route — the Registrar, a competence reviewer, a health committee, a Professional Conduct Committee, the Tribunal — weighs the same three things: reflection, insight and remediation. The course teaches the four parts of a response that shows them.

A weak response is itself read as a concern about recurrence.

The facts, ownedWhat happened, in order, from your own knowledge, without the account changing between the first letter and the hearing — and the trigger named for what it is.The course’s fourth section sets weak and strong responses side by side.
The standard, namedYour own authority’s standard under section 118, cited by heading, and the gap between it and what happened stated plainly.The course reads the five authorities side by side so you can cite yours.
The effect, acknowledgedOn the patient, the whānau, the colleague or the funder, in their terms — the insight every reader weighs.The course’s fifth section is reflection, insight and remediation, and how they connect.
The change, evidenced and datedCPD targeted to the concern, an audit repeated, supervision with reports, feedback gathered on purpose — indexed in a portfolio.This course is the dated item you attach — and the sixth section teaches the portfolio.

The practitioners the authorities find fit after a concern are those whose portfolio shows the habit was already there.

Take advice from your indemnity insurer, your union or a lawyer before you respond to anyone.

Facing a Council or Board investigation, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.

Buy this course — NZ$200

How this course helps with a Council or Board investigation

The map of fitness to practise in New Zealand: three routes, seven triggers, five authorities, and the response that works on every one.

It names the seven triggers and the route each takes

Clinical competence, dishonesty, boundaries, confidentiality, behaviour and communication, health, and systems failures: for each, what the authorities see, which of the three routes it takes under the Act, and what the response needs. The section that tells you where your matter is going.

It sets out the three things every reader assesses

Reflection — looking back analytically; insight — understanding why the lapse mattered; remediation — concrete, verifiable action. How they interconnect, what each authority expects of each, and the practical tips the course document gives. Then the portfolio that holds them: its purpose, reflective statements, CPD, clinical or administrative audit, supervision or mentorship, patient and colleague feedback, and how the evidence is integrated so a reviewer can find it.

It shows the whole thing working across five professions

A doctor’s prescribing safety, a nurse’s documentation integrity, a pharmacist’s probity, a dentist’s consent and transparency, an allied health practitioner’s boundaries: in each, the trigger, the route, the response and the outcome. The lessons are shared because the Act is.

It prepares you for the hearing

Professionalism at a Committee meeting and a Tribunal hearing: behaviour, communication and the presentation of evidence; the conduct the Tribunal’s published decisions say weakens a case and the conduct that strengthens one; and the portfolio — reflective statements, CPD, audit, supervision reports, feedback, indexed — that every reader reads beside the response. Counts: reflective statements that own the facts and name the standard; CPD targeted to the concern, this course’s dated certificate among it; a clinical or administrative audit, repeated; supervision or mentorship with reports; patient and colleague feedback gathered on purpose; and an index that lets a reviewer find the evidence for each claim in the reflection. Counts for little: a general CPD log, a reflection written by someone else, a promise where evidence should be, an account that changed between the first letter and the hearing. For the stages from the first letter to the Tribunal, see the Council and Board investigation process, explained.

Read the primary sources

Who wrote it

Dr Shehzad Iqbal

Course author and facilitator, Healthcare Ethics New Zealand

Dr Iqbal has designed and delivered ethics, probity and professionalism training for healthcare professionals since 2020, working with registrants across regulated health professions, online and face to face. He combines clinical practice with formal postgraduate training in healthcare law and ethics.

MBBS · MRCS · MRCGP · Postgraduate Certificate in Healthcare Law and Ethics, University of Dundee

Written and reviewed by Dr Shehzad Iqbal. Last reviewed September 2026.

In short

Fitness to Practise for Healthcare Professionals is a two-hour remediation course, self-paced, for any practitioner facing a notification, investigation, complaint or allegation before one of New Zealand’s 18 responsible authorities. It is the map of fitness to practise under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003: what it means and why it matters; the Medical Council, the Nursing Council, the Pharmacy Council, the Dental Council and the allied HPCA authorities in their own words; the seven triggers for an investigation and the route each takes; weak against strong responses; reflection, insight and remediation as the three things every reader assesses; the portfolio that evidences them; five professions’ case studies; professionalism at hearings; and fitness to practise as a lifelong standard. Ten sections with a reflective quiz after each of the first nine, a post-course assessment, and a dated certificate from Healthcare Ethics Courses for your recertification. Remediation, not advice: the course decides no matter, and your indemnity insurer, your union or association or a lawyer should read anything before it goes to your authority.

What fitness to practise means in New Zealand

One statute, three questions, eighteen authorities. The Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 exists to protect the health and safety of the public by ensuring practitioners are fit to practise, and it lets every responsible authority ask three things about any practitioner: is their competence at the required standard for their scope; is their health such that they can practise safely; and has their conduct met the standards the authority sets under section 118. Each question has its own route — a competence review, a health process, a Professional Conduct Committee — and the conduct route can end before the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal, the one national body that hears charges for every profession. In 2024/25 the Medical Council received 314 notifications and the Commissioner 3,628 complaints; a charge is one outcome among several.

Two things are New Zealand-specific. The first is that the routes are the same for every profession: a physiotherapist, a pharmacist and a psychologist are reviewed, examined and charged under the same sections, before committees their own authority names and one shared Tribunal, so the course can be written once for all 18. The second is Te Tiriti o Waitangi: cultural competence is a standard every authority must set, a cultural safety concern is a concern for every authority, and the course reads the triggers through it.

The three companion courses

Insight, reflection and remediation — the three things every decision-maker weighs
Insight for Fitness to Practise

The standard you are measured against

Every authority sets its own standards; section 118 of the Act requires it
Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003

If a notification has been made

The 18 authorities and the professions each regulates
Responsible authorities under the Act

The Tribunal

Charges laid, orders made, and the courses practitioners are ordered to complete
Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal

What these words mean

The three terms that decide where a matter goes, and the other words the course uses.

Professional Conduct Committee: The committee an authority appoints where a notification is about conduct or a conviction: members of the profession and a layperson, with a legal adviser. It investigates, reads the response, meets the practitioner and recommends what follows.
Professional misconduct: The Tribunal’s ground under s 100 of the Act: malpractice or negligence in your scope of practice, or conduct that has brought or was likely to bring discredit to the profession. Dishonesty, a boundary breach and a breach of confidence are among the findings made under it.
Portfolio: The organised file of reflective statements, CPD, audit, supervision reports and feedback that evidences reflection, insight and remediation. What every reader of a fitness to practise matter reads beside the response.
The three routes under the HPCA Act: Fitness to practise is the phrase practitioners use for the whole process. Under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 the Council or Board takes one of three routes: a competence review (your practice against the required standard); the health process — the Act’s fitness to practise provisions, for impairment by a mental or physical condition; or a referral of your conduct to a Professional Conduct Committee, which can lay a charge of professional misconduct before the Tribunal. Which route your letter names tells you how the matter is being treated.

Responsible authority, scope of practice, competence review, health process, Professional Conduct Committee, practising certificate, portfolio and the other terms the course uses

Fitness to practise: Whether a practitioner can be relied on to practise safely now, assessed by their authority through competence, health and conduct. The Act’s purpose, and the question every stage of every route is answering.
Responsible authority: One of the 18 Councils and Boards the Act appoints to register a profession, set its standards and consider notifications. Yours issues your practising certificate and applies its own standards through the routes the Act gives every authority.
Scope of practice: The work your registration permits, as your authority defines it. Competence is assessed against the standards for your scope, and conditions are included in it.
Competence review: The Act’s formal way of asking whether practice meets the required standard: a review by a panel, a committee or independent reviewers, each authority naming its own, which may lead to a competence programme, conditions, an assessment or supervision.
Health process: The Act’s route where a mental or physical condition may affect practice: a medical examination the authority may require, conditions or suspension while the practitioner is unable to practise, and support. Separate from conduct.
Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal: The one national tribunal that hears charges against practitioners of every profession: a legally qualified chair, three members of the profession and a layperson. Its penalties run from censure to cancellation, and its decisions are published.
Practising certificate: The annual certificate without which a registered practitioner may not practise. What an interim suspension removes, what conditions attach to, and what a health process may suspend while the practitioner is unable to practise.

The provisions a fitness to practise matter runs under

Every route a concern about a practitioner can take in New Zealand is in one statute, the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003, and the standard the concern is measured against is the one your own Council or Board publishes under it. These are the sections a practitioner meets, in the order they tend to arrive.

Section 34 — notifying a risk of harm

A practitioner who believes another practitioner may pose a risk of harm to the public by practising below the required standard must notify the Registrar, and so must an employer who dismisses a practitioner, or accepts a resignation, for reasons relating to competence. A matter often starts under this section, and the practitioner is told who notified and why. Read it.

For this course: This is the section a matter often starts under: it tells you who may notify, who must, and why the first letter from the authority can arrive before you knew a concern existed.

Section 36 — review of competence

Where an authority has reason to believe a practitioner may not be practising to the required standard of competence, it may review that competence against the standards it sets for the scope of practice — and against your own account of it, which is read before anything else. The competence route. Read it.

For this course: The competence route: the course walks through what a review looks at for each authority and why a practitioner’s own account of the gap is read before anything else.

Section 71 — referral to a Professional Conduct Committee

Where the concern is about conduct, or the practitioner has been convicted of a specified offence, the authority refers it to a Professional Conduct Committee — two members of the profession and a layperson, with a legal adviser — which investigates independently and asks for your written response. The conduct route. Read it.

For this course: The conduct route: the course explains what sends a matter to a Committee rather than to a review, and why the practitioner’s written response shapes the referral.

Section 100 — the grounds of discipline

The Tribunal may discipline for professional misconduct — malpractice or negligence in the scope of practice, or conduct that has brought or was likely to bring discredit to the profession — for a conviction that reflects adversely on fitness to practise, for practising outside the scope, and for breaching a condition or an order. The threshold between a matter that ends with the authority and one that reaches the Tribunal. Read it.

For this course: The grounds of discipline are the threshold between a matter that ends with the authority and one that reaches the Tribunal; the course explains where the threshold is.

Section 101 — the penalties

Censure, conditions on the scope of practice, suspension for up to three years, cancellation of registration, a fine of up to NZ$30,000 and costs. The Tribunal’s published decisions show what it weighs when it chooses among them, and insight, remediation and conduct since the events recur in every one. Read it.

For this course: The penalties are the last stage of the process the course describes, and the course explains how the Tribunal chooses among them and what it weighs.

Also engaged: Section 45 — notifying a health concern: the health route’s own trigger, handled apart from conduct · Section 38 — orders after a review: a competence programme, conditions, an assessment or supervision, none a penalty · Section 39 — interim suspension pending a review: a precaution where there is a risk of serious harm, not a finding · Section 80 — what a Professional Conduct Committee may recommend: a charge is one of several outcomes, not the default · Section 118 — the authority sets your standards: read your own code before you read anything else.

The routes, stage by stage, in the Act’s own terms

One Act for every profession, three routes, one Tribunal — and at every stage the reader weighs the same three things: reflection, insight and remediation.

The notification
Anyone may notify your Council or Board; an employer must, when a practitioner is dismissed or resigns for reasons relating to competence; a practitioner or employer must notify a health condition that may affect practice; the Health and Disability Commissioner refers complaints about care. The first letter tells you who notified and under which section of the Act.
The Registrar sorts the matter: competence, health or conduct
The Registrar or a delegated committee reads the notification and your response and decides the route — a matter can be on two at once. Of the Medical Council’s 314 notifications in 2024/25, 71 ended with no further action and 37 with an educational letter at this stage; 13 went to competence assessment and 14 to a Professional Conduct Committee.
The competence route: sections 36 to 39
A review of your practice against the standards for your scope by reviewers your authority names; then a competence programme, conditions, an examination or supervision where the standard is not met — educative, not discipline. Where there is a risk of serious harm, an interim suspension or interim conditions while the review runs: a precaution, not a finding, and reviewed.
The health route: sections 45 to 50
Where a mental or physical condition may affect practice: a medical examination the authority may require, conditions or suspension while you are unable to practise, and support. Separate from conduct, handled apart from it, and read as a professional strength when the practitioner declared it first.
The conduct route: a Professional Conduct Committee, sections 71 to 80
Members of your profession and a layperson, with a legal adviser, investigate independently, read your written response, and meet you. They may recommend counselling, a review of competence, health or scope, referral to the Police, no further action or conciliation — or lay a charge before the Tribunal. A charge is one of several outcomes, not the default.
The Tribunal: sections 100 and 101
A legally qualified chair, three members of your profession and a layperson hear a charge of professional misconduct — malpractice or negligence in the scope, or conduct that discredits the profession — usually in public. Censure, conditions, suspension for up to three years, cancellation, a fine of up to NZ$30,000 and costs; insight, remediation and conduct since the events are weighed in every published decision.

Facing a Council or Board investigation, complaint or allegation? This course helps you remediate — and demonstrate it.

Buy this course — NZ$200

This course is written for every registered profession under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 — the process is the same for all. Ten professions also have Ethics and Professionalism courses written to their own Council or Board’s standard. Find the courses for your profession →

Frequently asked questions

What does fitness to practise actually mean in New Zealand?

Three questions the Act lets your authority ask: is your competence at the required standard for your scope, is your health such that you can practise safely, and has your conduct met the standards your authority sets. Each has its own route — a competence review, a health process, a Professional Conduct Committee — and the course opens by explaining all three and how they connect.

Which route will my matter take?

The Registrar or a delegated committee decides on reading the notification and your response. As a rule: a clinical concern goes to competence; a condition goes to health; dishonesty, boundaries, confidentiality and behaviour go to conduct; and a matter can be on two routes at once, such as a health concern that put patients at risk. The course’s section on the seven triggers says which route each takes.

Should I take advice before I respond?

Yes — before anything goes to your Council or Board, a competence reviewer, a health committee, a Professional Conduct Committee, the Tribunal or your employer. Your indemnity insurer, your union or professional association, or a lawyer will read a response before it is sent. Nothing on this page is legal advice, and no course determines the outcome of a matter.

Is a competence review a disciplinary process?

No, and every authority says so in its own words. It is the Act’s way of asking whether practice meets the standard and, if not, of putting a programme, conditions or supervision in place to bring it there. It becomes a conduct matter only where the practitioner does not engage with it. The course covers what reviewers look at and how the programme is built from what you recognise.

What do the authorities mean by a weak response?

Denial, excuses, blame, a vague reflection, a promise where evidence should be, an account that changes, and the acknowledgement followed by but. A strong response is the opposite of each: the facts owned, the standard named, the effect acknowledged, change evidenced and dated. The course’s fourth section sets them side by side with case comparisons.

What is the difference between reflection, insight and remediation?

Reflection looks back — the written analytical account of what happened. Insight is understanding why it mattered, against the standard and for the patient. Remediation is what has been done about it, verifiably. Every reader assesses all three, they interconnect, and the course has a section on each and on how they work together. Each also has a course of its own on this site.

What goes in a fitness to practise portfolio — and will my Council or Board accept this course as part of it?

Reflective statements; CPD targeted to the concern, this course’s dated certificate among it; a clinical or administrative audit, repeated; supervision or mentorship with reports; patient and colleague feedback gathered on purpose; and an index that lets a reviewer find the evidence for each claim in the reflection. The course’s sixth section is the portfolio. No provider is accredited by any Council or Board, and no course decides a matter. What every authority, a Committee and the Tribunal weigh is dated, targeted remediation with reflection that engages your own code — and this course is written to the ground every authority’s standard shares on this subject, so the connection to yours is plain. The Tribunal has itself ordered education in ethics as a condition of returning to practice. Check the wording of any direction with your indemnity insurer, union, professional association or lawyer before you rely on it.

How should I conduct myself at a hearing?

As the practitioner the portfolio describes. The course’s section on professionalism at hearings covers behaviour, communication and the presentation of evidence, and names the conduct the Tribunal’s decisions say weakens a case — arguing the facts already found, blaming the complainant, reading a reflection written by someone else — and the conduct that strengthens one.

The failure was the system’s, not mine. Is that a fitness to practise matter?

It can be, and it is the trigger practitioners least expect. The authorities read for what the individual saw and did within a system that failed: whether the concern was escalated, the colleague challenged, the unsafe process declined. The course treats systems awareness and team failures as one of the seven triggers and accountability within a team as its own question.

How is this different from the Dealing with a Complaint or Investigation course?

This course is the map: what fitness to practise is, the routes, the triggers, the response, the portfolio and the hearing. The Complaint course is what to do at each step: the first response, the employer’s process, the patient conversation, records and statements, and your own wellbeing. They pair, this one first.

Which Council or Board is this course written for?

All eighteen. The routes, the committees and the Tribunal are the same under the Act for every profession, and the course reads the Medical Council, Nursing Council, Pharmacy Council and Dental Council expectations in their own words with the allied professions’ alongside. Your response is written to your own authority’s standard.

How long does it take, and how long do I have access?

The course is 2 CPD hours, self-paced, with twelve months’ access from purchase. The certificate is issued on completion, dated, with the course title and the CPD hours, for a response, a portfolio or your recertification.

This course is the overview. Three companion courses take the parts that most affect an outcome in depth.

Insight for Fitness to Practise

Asked to show insight after a notification? The staged model, the four components a Council or Tribunal assesses, and what undermines it. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Reflection for Fitness to Practise

Asked for a written reflection or a letter of reflection after a notification? Three models, what a strong statement contains, five pitfalls. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Remediation for Fitness to Practise

Remediation after a Council or Board notification: root cause not symptom, SMART goals, the seven parts of a written plan, evidence of change. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Dealing with a Complaint or Investigation Professionally

Responding to a complaint, notification, competence review or conduct committee in NZ: the first letter, the meeting, what to write. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals

A Council or Board notification about honesty: records, qualifications, ACC claims, undeclared interests, or your account of what happened. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Ensuring Clinical Competence and Patient Safety

When a notification or competence review concerns clinical competence: assessment, diagnosis, deterioration, medication, follow-up and scope. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Rebuilding Trust of Patients, Colleagues, the Public and the Regulator

After a notification, conditions or a Tribunal finding in NZ, what is assessed is what you did next: insight, remediation, evidence of change. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200