English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article examines how the health system in Australia ensures public protection and confidence when making determinations about the reinstatement of health practitioners who have previously been deregistered for sexual misconduct. Three main issues are addressed: first, the lack of public process and accessible reasons concerning the majority of reinstatement decisions, with consequent omissions in the public record and impact upon public confidence. Second, a detailed analysis is undertaken of the limited available reinstatement decisions, to understand how legislative and jurisprudential criteria of public protection (including protecting patient safety, promoting professional standards and maintaining public confidence) are weighed against the ‘rehabilitative’ impetus within a context strongly influenced by health evidence and therapeutic considerations. Third, a call is made to develop a responsive, modern and transparent framework for understanding and assessing the impact on public confidence of disciplinary decisions concerning the reinstatement of health practitioners.

Restoration to practice of health practitioners removed for serious sexual misconduct: evaluating public confidence and assessing risk