The HCPC’s consultation on new Standards of Conduct, Performance & Ethics and new Social Media Guidance will close tomorrow night (Friday 16 June) at 23.59, so this really is your final chance to comment!
For me, there are three proposals of particular concern.
In relation to the new Social Media Guidance, the HCPC proposes to introduce a new obligation on registrants to ensure the content they share on social media “does not contradict government public health messages”. This seems to demonstrate a complete lack of regard for registrants’ entitlements to freedom of expression (Human Rights Act Article 10) and freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Human Rights Act Article 9). It is also widely recognised that government public health messaging is not infallible! For an obvious example, the recent report from the Commons Science & Technology Committee and Health & Social Care Committee states (in respect of the government’s Covid-19 public health messaging in late 2019 and early 2020) “It is now clear that this was the wrong policy, and that it led to a higher initial death toll”.
In relation to the proposed new Standards of Conduct, Performance & Ethics, it is very disappointing that no change has been proposed to Standard 9.5. Standard 9.5 is the Standard which requires a registrant to self-refer to the HCPC if they “have had any restriction placed on [their] practice”. We know that this Standard is the cause of large numbers of unnecessary HCPC self-referrals by paramedics in particular, as it is commonplace in NHS Ambulance Trusts (where a majority of paramedics are employed) for a neutral, without prejudice restriction of practice to immediately be imposed when any serious incident occurs or any complaint is received. The fact that without prejudice restriction is so commonplace within NHS Ambulance Trusts is the main reason why 42% of HCPC fitness to practise investigations involving paramedics commence via self-referral (by comparison to an average of only 18% across the HCPC-regulated professions as a whole). Many of the fitness to practise investigations triggered in this manner are a waste of time and needlessly put the paramedic at risk of the serious mental ill-health and suicide risk associated with fitness to practise investigations. The wording of Standard 9.5 has long needed to be amended. As a minimum, it should be changed to an obligation to self-refer when “you have had any substantive restriction placed on your practice following the conclusion of an employer’s investigation”.
My third key concern relates to the proposed new obligation for registrants to be aware of the impact of their position of power and trust as a health and care professional “in social or personal settings”. It is right of course that registrants should be aware of the imbalance of power inherent in registrant/service user professional interactions, but suggesting that registrants must be aware of their supposed position of power and trust in social and personal settings is unreasonable. The wording of the proposed new Standard 1.8 is ambiguous, there doesn’t appear to be any evidential basis for such a requirement and it again displays a total lack of regard for registrants’ Human Rights Act Article 8 entitlements to respect for private life. The obligation for registrants to maintain professional boundaries and not abuse their position is already adequately covered in the wording of new Standard 1.9 – 1.12.
The link to respond to the HCPC consultation is: https://lnkd.in/eQpvFaSA