Critique of the HPC Fitness to Practise System

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

From HPC Watchdog:

THE UNITED KINGDOMS COUNCIL FOR PSYCHOTHERAPY'S CRITIQUE OF HPC’S FITNESS TO PRACTISE SYSTEM

 

And how did that make them feel?

 

Robert,

Makes interesting reading and I would agree with their concerns regarding the FtP system which I personally feel is heavily biased towards the complainant. Clearly there are areas where a regulator must be properly concerned with public safety and needs to act quickly, however, certainly many instances of complaints could be dealt with with an arbitrary body or through conciliation between the third parties - patient and practitioner or practitioner and employer. Podiatry is also different insomuch as we have a sizable number of practitioners in private practice (70% of the registered profession) and this has to be taken into account when complaints are received.

I suspect you know that I was subject to a malicious complaint nearly 4 years ago and after almost 12 months of investigation I received notice that there was no case to answer. Not surprising as the PCT had already carried out a full enquiry and found the complaint - from another HPC registered practitioner - was unfounded and vexatious and malicious, and formed a systematic pattern of a wider campaign of abuse and harassment against PCT employees by this individual. That said, I was relieved to hear the FtP conclusions and decision - however, I was unhappy that the same FtP department would take no action against that individual unless I made a formal complaint myself!

This begs the question about the fairness of the HPC regulatons when malicious complaints are made from a third party against a registered podiatrist in private practice. Let's assume, hypothetically, that Miss Smith makes an appointment with Mr Jones for a painful foot. Mr Jones makes a diagnosis and recommends a set of custom orthoses which are prescribed and manufactured and supplied at a later date. Miss Smith then collects orthoses and pays her fee by cheque......which subsequently bounces. Mr Jones sends several reminders and tries to call Miss Smith - but to no avail. In the end his solicitor advises him to lodge a small claims at the local court - which he does - but still receives no payment as Miss Smith has a string of debts and is on benefits. By this time however, the patient-practitioner relationship is beyond repair and Mr Jones decides to write the debt off and forget about the whole episode.

Not so Miss Smith, who decides, perversely, to seek some retribution of the unfortunate Mr Jones. So, she engages the assistance of one of her friends - Miss Bagpuss - who makes an appointment with Mr Jones. The appointment is unremarkable, but a week later Mr Jones finds himself subject of an Interim Practice Order from the HPC as an allegation of sexual impropriety has been made against him by Miss Bagpuss..... This information is made available to the public via the HPC website and appears in the local newspapers the following week after details were leaked to a reporter from a "concerned" member of the public - Miss Smith.

The impact on Mr Jones will be considerable. Financially, he will face substantial loss of earning - at least until his FtP hearing - and professionally his reputation will be damaged, perhaps irreparably (no smoke without fire etc). What happens afterwards is largely irrelevant in that the complaint may be dropped or a hearing takes place and is dismissed as the complainant is an unreliable witness - but by that stage the damage has been done.

There is nothing in the FtP protocols which deters malicious complainants from fabricating unfounded allegations against a registrant. When complaints are made - and are subsequently found to be malicious, I feel the HPC have a duty of care towards their registrants and should report the complainant to the police and pursue the action against them.

I suspended my registration with the HPC two years ago on principle and I am still awaiting the outcome of correspondence with the registrar which deals with this and other concerns I'll let you know when we achieve resolution...!

 

This is an interesting blog from someone within the psychotherapy profession who have, so far, resisited attempts at regulation by the HPC -as have the osteopaths who are still self regulated by the GOC. Pity we were sold down the river by some in our profession....

http://hpcwatchdog.blogspot.com/2010/04/united-kingdoms-council-for.html