Council or Board notification · All 18 responsible authorities

Professionalism for Healthcare Professionals for Paramedics, Chinese Medicine Practitioners and all other Health Practitioners facing a Council or Board investigation, complaint or allegation

The allegation concerns your professionalism, behaviour or conduct as a health practitioner.

Communication — a patient not told openly, or spoken to with contempt
Dishonesty — a timesheet, record, certificate or claim that isn’t true
Boundaries — a boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague
Records — a note written days later, altered, or never made
Online conduct — a post that named a ward, a colleague or a patient
Registration — practising without a current practising certificate
Co-operation — not responding to your Council, Board or its Committee
Any other — professional concern or allegation of unprofessional conduct

Facing an allegation of unprofessional behaviour or misconduct like these — from your Council or Board, a Professional Conduct Committee or the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal?

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: Paramedics, occupational therapists, podiatrists, dietitians, medical radiation technologists, medical laboratory scientists, anaesthetic technicians, Chinese medicine practitioners, psychotherapists and any other health practitioner facing a Council or Board complaint, notification or allegation, a Professional Conduct Committee investigation or a competence review about professional behaviour or conduct — an allegation of unprofessional behaviour or conduct
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, 51 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

49Lessons, plus a post-course assessment

NZ$200One off. Twelve months' access

Who this course is for

Facing an allegation of unprofessional behaviour or conduct

Whether you are a paramedic, a dietitian, a Chinese medicine practitioner or any other registered practitioner, your authority’s letter says a remark, an absence, a record, a post, a relationship or a shift worked unwell fell short of its standard. This course is how you account for it in that standard’s own words — and show you have remediated.

Dealing with a Council or Board complaint

From a patient, whānau, a colleague, an employer required to notify, ACC or a court. The Registrar has read it for risk and asked for your response within a set number of days; this course gives it the structure every authority reads for, and names the sentence that turns a manageable matter into a Committee referral.

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.

Under a competence review, conditions or supervision

Ethical conduct and professional behaviour are standards every authority must set, and a review reads decisions and conduct as well as skills. A dated certificate and a reflective account written against your own code are evidence a reviewer, a supervisor or a competence programme can weigh.

Before a Professional Conduct Committee

Members of your own profession and a layperson, with a legal adviser, investigate independently, read your response and usually meet you. They can recommend counselling or a review, decide on no further action or conciliation, or lay a charge before the Tribunal.

Facing a misconduct charge or hearing before the Tribunal

A charge has been laid, or a penalty is being decided — and the Tribunal has cancelled and suspended registrations across the professions for dishonesty, boundary breaches and consent failures, ordering education in ethics, boundaries and consent as part of its penalties. Remediation completed before the hearing, dated and documented, is weighed every time.

The concerns this course speaks to

Communication, respect and the way colleagues were treated

A patient spoken to as a problem, a diagnosis delivered without care, a junior humiliated, a colleague dismissed in front of others, a shift left without handover. Respect for patients and for colleagues is written into every authority’s standard, and communication is among the matters most often raised with the authorities the Auditor-General reviewed.

Probity and an allegation of dishonesty

A timesheet, a sick-leave certificate, a record changed after the event, a qualification overstated, an ACC or subsidy claim for something not done, a false declaration on a practising-certificate application. Registration rests on honesty, and the Tribunal has cancelled registrations for dishonesty across the professions — where a clinical error would not have ended one.

Boundaries with patients and colleagues

A relationship with a patient or a former patient, a gift accepted, a patient followed on social media, a family member treated without a record, a colleague pursued after being told no. Every authority publishes a boundaries standard or guideline and places the responsibility with the practitioner; the Tribunal has suspended and cancelled registrations for it.

Records that outlive the event

A note written days later or not at all, a handover that did not happen, a record altered after a complaint, a file browsed with no reason to look. The record is the part of the conduct everyone else can see; the Tribunal has censured a practitioner for keeping no notes for thousands of patients, and another for browsing hospital files.

Online conduct

A ward named in a post, a patient recognisable, an employer or a colleague criticised with your professional title attached, a message to a patient from a personal account, a public health claim the evidence does not support. The Nursing, Medical, Pharmacy and Dental Councils have each published on it; the Tribunal has suspended a pharmacist for misleading public statements.

Registration and scope

Practising without a current practising certificate, or while suspended; a scope claimed that the register does not show; work beyond your training. Practising without a practising certificate is among the matters often raised with the authorities, and the Tribunal has struck off a practitioner for it.

Dealing with your Council or Board

Letters not answered, a Committee’s requests ignored, a message to a witness that reads as pressure. The Tribunal found a practitioner’s failure to respond to the Board and its Committee, with intimidating messages to a witness, to be professional misconduct; how you deal with the process is read as conduct in its own right.

Health, fitness and any other concern

Practising while impaired, unwell or exhausted; substance use that reached the workplace; a condition concealed when it should have been declared. Every authority has a health route separate from its conduct route. Any allegation of unprofessional conduct is measured against a part of your own standard — the course shows you how to find it and answer it.

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

Section 01

Introduction — Why Professionalism Matters in New Zealand Healthcare

Four lessons

Section 02

Defining Professionalism — Behaviour, Values, and Accountability

Five lessons

Section 03

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

Six lessons

Section 04

Core Attributes of Professionalism — Probity, Boundaries, Communication, Competence

Five lessons

Section 05

Unprofessional Behaviour — Common Triggers for Regulator Concern

Seven lessons

Section 06

Reflection and Professionalism — Learning from Lapses

Six lessons

Section 07

Case Studies — Professionalism in Action Across New Zealand

Six lessons

Section 08

Strengthening Professionalism Through CPD, Audits, and Supervision

Five lessons

Section 09

Embedding Professionalism into Daily Practice and Identity

Five lessons

Section 10

Conclusion and Key Takeaways

Key takeaways and the post-course assessment

Show every lesson title

Section 01 · Introduction — Why Professionalism Matters in New Zealand Healthcare: Why Professionalism Matters for Patients; Why Professionalism Matters for Regulators; Why Professionalism Matters for the Profession; Professionalism Beyond Compliance.
Section 02 · Defining Professionalism — Behaviour, Values, and Accountability: Behaviour; Values; Accountability; Professionalism in Everyday Practice; Why Professionalism is a Core Competence.
Section 03 · Regulator Perspectives on Professionalism — 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 Regulator Themes.
Section 04 · Core Attributes of Professionalism — Probity, Boundaries, Communication, Competence: Probity; Boundaries; Communication; Competence; How Attributes Work Together.
Section 05 · Unprofessional Behaviour — Common Triggers for Regulator Concern: Dishonesty and Lack of Probity; Disrespect and Poor Attitude; Boundary Violations; Poor Communication and Documentation; Substance Misuse and Health Concerns; Digital Professionalism Lapses; Why Unprofessional Behaviour Matters.
Section 06 · Reflection and Professionalism — Learning from Lapses: What Reflection Means for Professionalism; How Reflection Strengthens Professionalism; Weak vs Strong Reflection; Reflective Models to Support Professionalism; Reflection as Evidence of Professionalism; Practical Tips for Effective Reflection.
Section 07 · Case Studies — Professionalism in Action Across New Zealand: Medicine — Candour and Accountability; Nursing — Respect and Professional Communication; Pharmacy — Probity and Integrity; Dentistry — Consent and Transparency; Allied Health — Boundaries and Professional Distance; Shared Lessons Across Professions.
Section 08 · Strengthening Professionalism Through CPD, Audits, and Supervision: CPD (Continuing Professional Development); Audits; Supervision and Mentorship; Integrating CPD, Audits, and Supervision; Practical Tips for Strengthening Professionalism.
Section 09 · Embedding Professionalism into Daily Practice and Identity: Professionalism as Identity; Daily Habits that Reinforce Professionalism; Mentorship and Role Modelling; Building Resilience to Sustain Professionalism; Professionalism Across a Career.
Section 10 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways: Conclusion; Key Takeaways.

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

Eighteen authorities, one Act, and the same four readings of a response. A competence reviewer, a Professional Conduct Committee and the Tribunal read it the same way.

The Registrar reads for risk first — the contact ended, the record corrected and declared, the post removed, the health plan in place.

The factsThe events in order, plainly, with the record cited — not the roster, the system or the other person as an explanation.Weak and strong responses to the same events show the tone that works.
Which standardHonesty for the timesheet, respect for the remark, the boundaries guideline for the friendship, the record-keeping standard for the note written late — named by you from your own authority’s document.The course reads the four Councils’ standards and the allied professions’ alongside, so you can cite yours by its headings.
The effectOn the patient, the whānau, the colleague or the junior, in their terms rather than yours.The reflective account has a section of its own, with a weak and a strong one side by side.
What someone else can confirmSomething changed, with dates, that a supervisor, a mentor, an auditor or a health plan can confirm.This course is the dated item you attach — and it tells you how to build the rest.

An acknowledgement followed by “but” is not a reflection — and do not send the first draft.

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

Four attributes, six triggers and five professions’ case studies, built into the response a professionalism matter needs.

It works through the four attributes a notification tests

Probity, boundaries, communication and competence. Each has a section: what the standard expects, what the notifications about it usually describe, and how a lapse in one attribute reaches the others — the boundary that produced the dishonest record, the poor communication that became a boundary. The section on unprofessional behaviour then names the six triggers the authorities see most: dishonesty, disrespect, boundary violations, poor communication and documentation, substance misuse and health, and digital lapses.

It teaches the reflection the authorities read for

Weak reflection and strong reflection set side by side, the models that help — Gibbs, Johns, and the simpler what, so what, now what — and how a reflective account becomes evidence: specific to the event, in your own words, with the standard named and the effect on the patient or the colleague described as they would describe it. The course also names what every authority reads as the absence of insight: the explanation that becomes a justification, and the acknowledgement followed by but.

It shows the same lapse across five professions

A doctor who did not disclose an error, a nurse who spoke to a patient with contempt, a pharmacist who altered a record, a dentist who did not explain the cost, an allied health practitioner who let a relationship drift. In each, what the authority looked at, what the practitioner’s response contained, and what the Committee or the Tribunal made of it. The lessons are the same across professions because the standards are.

It sets out what counts as evidenced change

Counts: this course’s dated certificate; CPD targeted to the principle or standard concerned; a supervisor’s, mentor’s or peer’s written reports; an audit of records, consent documentation or claims repeated after an interval; patient or colleague feedback gathered for the purpose; a health plan where health is part of it; Māori-led cultural safety education where the concern engages it; restitution where money is involved; reflection that cites your code by its own headings. Counts for little: hours on another subject, the system or the other person blamed, character references in place of an account, an apology for the complaint, and reflection that argues the case. 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

Professionalism 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 written to the ground the authorities’ standards share — Good medical practice, the Nursing Council’s Code of Conduct, the Pharmacy Council’s Code of Ethics, the Dental Council’s Standards Framework and the standards of the allied professions — and it defines professionalism through behaviour, values and accountability, tests it through four attributes (probity, boundaries, communication, competence), names the six triggers for regulator concern, and works through case studies from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry and allied health. It covers the reflection every authority reads for, and how CPD, audit and supervision become evidence of change. 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 professionalism means to New Zealand’s Councils and Boards

There is no single definition of professionalism in New Zealand, and there does not need to be. The Act requires each of the eighteen responsible authorities to set standards of clinical competence, cultural competence and ethical conduct for its own profession — Good medical practice for doctors, the Code of Conduct for nurses, the Code of Ethics for pharmacists, the Standards Framework for oral health practitioners, and a code or a set of standards for every allied profession. Read together they describe the same practitioner: honest, respectful, within scope, accountable. The course defines professionalism through behaviour, values and accountability, and through the four attributes a complaint tests: probity, boundaries, communication and competence.

Two things are New Zealand-specific. The employer: the Act requires employers to notify when a practitioner is dismissed or resigns for competence-related reasons, so conduct towards colleagues is treated as seriously as conduct towards patients. Te Tiriti o Waitangi: cultural competence is a standard every authority must set, and conduct that ignores tikanga, excludes whānau or treats a Māori patient with less respect is a professionalism complaint to each of them.

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 your authority appoints under the Act where a notification is about conduct: members of your profession and a layperson, with a legal adviser. It investigates independently, reads your response, usually meets you, and recommends what should follow.
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.
Probity: Honesty and integrity in everything a practitioner says, writes, signs and claims. The attribute registration rests on, and the one the Tribunal has cancelled registrations for across the professions.
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.

The authorities, the standards, the Committee and the other terms the course uses

Responsible authority: One of the 18 Councils and Boards the Act appoints to register a health profession, set its standards and consider notifications about its practitioners. Yours is the one that issues your practising certificate, and its standards are the ones a notification is measured against.
Standards of ethical conduct: The document each authority publishes under section 118 of the Act describing how its practitioners are expected to behave. The names differ — a code of conduct, a code of ethics, a standards framework, Good medical practice — but the ground they cover is shared, and the course is written to it.
Unprofessional behaviour or conduct: Conduct that falls short of the standard without being a clinical error: dishonesty, disrespect, a boundary crossed, poor communication or documentation, practising unwell, a lapse online. The phrase most notification letters use, and the phrase the course opens by defining.
Notification: A concern raised in writing with your authority by anyone — a patient, a whānau member, a colleague, an employer, ACC or a court. The Registrar considers it first, asks whether anything needs urgent action, and sorts it into competence, health or conduct.
Insight: Acceptance of what the conduct was, its seriousness and its effect on the patient, the colleague and the profession, without minimising it or shifting responsibility to the roster, the system or the other person. Read for in every response, and weighed by the Tribunal when it sets a penalty.
Reflection: A written account, specific to the event and in your own words, of what happened, why it mattered, what you understand now and what is different. Read by every authority as evidence of insight when it names the standard and the effect, and as its absence when it explains.
Remediation: Corrective action targeted to the lapse and verifiable by someone else: CPD on the attribute concerned, an audit repeated over time, supervision or mentoring with reports, feedback sought on purpose, a health plan where health is part of it. CPD hours on another subject count for little on their own.

The provisions a professionalism concern engages

Professionalism is conduct, and conduct is what the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 gives a Professional Conduct Committee and the Tribunal to decide. These are the provisions a professionalism notification runs under, and the standards that say what professional conduct is for each profession.

Section 118 — the authority sets your standards

Every responsible authority must set standards of clinical competence, cultural competence and ethical conduct for its profession. Professionalism is defined by each authority’s standard rather than by the Act, which is why the course reads the standard first and the Act second. Read it.

For this course: Professionalism is defined by each authority’s standard rather than by the Act, which is why the course reads the standard first and the Act second.

Section 71 — referral to a Professional Conduct Committee

A conduct concern — a remark, a record, a post, a boundary, a failure to respond — is referred to a Professional Conduct Committee of members of your profession and a layperson, with a legal adviser, which investigates independently, asks for your response and usually meets you. Read it.

For this course: Conduct is the Committee’s province, and a professionalism concern is by definition a conduct concern; the course explains what the referral means.

Section 100 — the grounds of discipline

The Tribunal may discipline for professional misconduct — malpractice or negligence, or conduct likely to bring discredit to the profession — for a conviction that reflects on fitness to practise, and for practising without a practising certificate. Across the professions it has found dishonesty, boundary breaches, consent failures, records not kept and files browsed to reach it. Read it.

For this course: Conduct that brings discredit to the profession is a ground of discipline in its own words, and professionalism concerns engage that ground directly.

Section 101 — the penalties

Censure, conditions, suspension for up to three years, cancellation of registration, a fine of up to NZ$30,000 and costs — and the Tribunal has ordered education in ethics, professional boundaries and informed consent as part of a penalty. Insight and remediation are weighed every time. Read it.

For this course: The Tribunal’s penalties for professionalism matters run the full range, and insight is the variable the course teaches you to control.

Also engaged: Section 34 — practitioners and employers must notify a risk of harm · Section 80 — what a Professional Conduct Committee may recommend, from counselling to a charge · Medical Council — Good medical practice, the standard for doctors · Nursing Council — the Code of Conduct and its boundaries and social media guidelines · Dental Council — the Standards Framework for Oral Health Practitioners.

What happens after a complaint reaches your Council or Board

The same stages under one Act, whichever authority registers you. At every one the same evidence is read: a specific reflection, insight that does not qualify itself, and remediation someone else can confirm — the earlier it exists, the earlier the matter ends.

The complaint reaches your Council or Board — or the Commissioner first
A patient, whānau, a colleague, an employer required to notify, ACC or a court raises the concern. A complaint about a patient’s care goes to the Health and Disability Commissioner first; your authority can act on public safety meanwhile. Then it sends you the complaint and asks for your response.
The route
The Registrar or a delegated committee reads it for risk, sorts it into competence, health or conduct, and decides: no further action, an educational letter, a competence review, the health route or a Professional Conduct Committee. A response that shows the standard understood and the conduct already addressed ends many matters here.
A competence review
Where the concern is practice below the required standard, your authority reviews it against the standards it sets for your scope — by a panel, a committee or independent reviewers, each authority naming its own. A competence programme, conditions, supervision or an assessment may follow.
The health route
Where a mental or physical condition — including one involving alcohol or drugs — may affect your practice, the authority may require a medical examination and set conditions or suspend you while you cannot practise. A health process, not a disciplinary one; a practitioner who declared first is read very differently.
A Professional Conduct Committee
Members of your profession and a layperson, with a legal adviser, investigate independently, read your response, usually meet you, and recommend anything from no further action, counselling or conciliation to a charge before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal
A legally qualified chair, three members of your profession and a layperson hear the charge, usually in public. Dishonesty and boundary breaches have ended registrations across the professions; any order — or an interim suspension or condition imposed along the way — is reviewed against what has changed.

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 for all other health practitioners — paramedics, occupational therapists, podiatrists, dietitians, medical radiation technologists, medical laboratory scientists, anaesthetic technicians, Chinese medicine practitioners and psychotherapists. Ten professions have a course written to their own Council or Board’s standard — doctors, nurses, midwives, dentists and oral health practitioners, pharmacists, psychologists, physiotherapists, chiropractors, osteopaths, optometrists and dispensing opticians. Find the course for your profession →

Frequently asked questions

What should my written response contain?

The events in order, in plain words; the standard you fell short of, named by you from your own authority’s document; the effect on the patient or the colleague in their terms; what you have done since, with dates and someone else’s confirmation; and what would be different next time — without the roster, the system or the other person offered as the reason. The course sets weak and strong responses to the same events side by side.

Will my Council or Board accept this course as remediation?

It is one dated item. The rest is CPD targeted to the attribute concerned, an audit repeated after an interval, supervision or mentoring with written reports, feedback gathered on purpose, and reflective writing that cites your standard. 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 the eighteen codes share, with the Medical, Nursing, Pharmacy and Dental Council documents read in their own words, so the connection to yours is plain. The Tribunal has itself ordered education in ethics, boundaries and consent as part of a penalty. Check the wording of any direction with your indemnity insurer, union, professional association or lawyer before you rely on it.

Should I take advice before I respond?

Yes — before anything goes to your Council or Board, a competence reviewer, a Professional Conduct Committee, the Tribunal or your employer. And answer your authority: not responding to a Board and its Committee has itself been found to be misconduct. Nothing on this page is legal advice, and no course determines the outcome of a matter.

Which Council or Board is this course written for?

All other health practitioners — paramedics, occupational therapists, podiatrists, dietitians, medical radiation technologists, medical laboratory scientists, anaesthetic technicians, Chinese medicine practitioners and psychotherapists — and any registered practitioner whose profession has no course of its own on this site. Ten professions have a course written to their authority’s own standard; this one is written to the ground all eighteen standards share, so you cite your own.

My notification came from my employer, not a patient. Is that different?

It is common, and the authorities treat it as seriously. The Act requires an employer to notify when a practitioner is dismissed or resigns for reasons relating to competence, and employers and colleagues notify conduct as well. A workplace notification usually describes behaviour towards colleagues, reliability or honesty in employment matters, and your authority reads it against the same standard as conduct towards a patient.

The concern is about a form I signed, a timesheet or a record I changed. How is that read?

As probity, before anything else. Registration rests on honesty, and the Tribunal has cancelled registrations for dishonesty across the professions where a clinical error would not have ended one. The response that survives it names the dishonesty as dishonesty, describes the pressure without offering it as the reason, and shows what has changed with dates. The course gives probity its own section.

I said something to a patient or a colleague that I regret. Is that a matter for my Council or Board?

It can be. Respect for patients and for colleagues is written into every authority’s standard, and a single remark that reached a patient, a whānau member or a junior colleague is enough for a complaint. Most such matters end early where the practitioner has acknowledged the remark without a qualifying clause, apologised to the person, and can show what they have done about it.

Does a health condition make this a conduct matter?

Not on its own. Every authority has a health route separate from its conduct route, and a practitioner who declared a condition and sought help is dealt with under it, usually with conditions and support rather than a Committee. A condition concealed when it should have been declared, or conduct that harmed a patient while the practitioner was impaired, engages both. The course covers what a credible response to a health-related notification contains.

I posted something online. Does my authority care?

Yes, and several have said so in guidance of their own. A ward named, a patient recognisable, an employer or a colleague criticised with your professional title attached, a patient messaged from a personal account: each is conduct, read against the same standard as conduct anywhere else. The course treats digital professionalism as ordinary professionalism.

Does the certificate count for my recertification?

Whether the hours count is for your authority’s recertification programme to say: some count hours, some ask for a plan and written reflection, and some require accredited activities for particular credits. The certificate is dated, carries the course title and the CPD hours, and is written to be kept with your reflective notes for whichever programme applies.

How is this different from the Ethics course for healthcare professionals?

The Ethics course is about reasoning: the five principles, consent, confidentiality, boundaries as an ethical question, and ethical reflection in a portfolio or at a hearing. This course is about conduct: how a practitioner behaves, what the authorities treat as unprofessional, the four attributes a notification tests, and the reflection, CPD, audit and supervision that show a change in behaviour.

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 your recertification, a competence programme or a response.

Notifications rarely raise one issue. These are the courses that pair with this one.

Ethics for Healthcare Professionals

A Council or Board notification about ethics in NZ: confidentiality, consent, boundaries, social media, records or honesty. 2 CPD hours, NZ$200.

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

Documentation for Healthcare Professionals

Clinical documentation and health records course for NZ health practitioners facing a notification about records, late entries or amendments. 2 CPD hours.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Social Media Professionalism and Boundaries for Healthcare Professionals

Social media course for NZ health practitioners facing a notification about a post, online contact with a patient, or advertising. 2 CPD hours, NZ$200.

2 CPD hours · NZ$200

Effective Communication for Healthcare Professionals

Communication course for NZ health practitioners facing a notification about manner, omission, honesty, explanation or handover. 2 CPD hours, NZ$200.

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

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