Medical Council · NMBI · Dental Council · PSI · CORU · Complaint or fitness to practise inquiry
Ensuring No Repeat of Misconduct or Mistake for healthcare professionals facing a complaint to their regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry
The question behind every letter: could this happen again?
- Promise — it will not happen again, with nothing to show why not
- Pattern — a mistake repeated, and the cause behind it not yet named
- Causes — fatigue, workload, a gap in knowledge or a system nobody examined
- Records — backdated notes or falsified stock records, and the dishonesty behind them
- Billing — false or inflated PRSI claims, or costly treatment without the alternatives
- Boundaries — a boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague, and no safeguard since
- Prescribing — antibiotics prescribed without need, or a prescribing error repeated
- Any other concern — where the question is whether it could happen again
Facing a complaint or a fitness to practise inquiry in which you must show that it will not happen again — before the Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland or CORU?
This course is for a healthcare professional who has to show that a mistake or misconduct will not be repeated. This course helps you remediate — and show the remediation, with a dated certificate for your written response, your reflection, an undertaking or an inquiry.
| Courses | Price per course | You save |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | €100 | No saving |
| 2 | €88 | €25 |
| 3 | €83 | €50 |
| 5 | €80 | €100 |
| 10 | €70 | €300 |
Add courses. The saving is applied in the basket.
Immediate access · certificate on completion · twelve months' access
- 2 CPD hours
- Self-paced
- Written for Ireland
- CPD certificate
- From €70 a course (Bulk Buy of 10)
Dr Shehzad IqbalFounder, course author and facilitatorMBBS, MRCS, MRCGP
Dr Mo MirzaCourse facilitatorMedically trained, UCL London
Ludmila UpenieceBusiness development and supportPsychology, UEL London
At a glance
- Who it is for
- Any healthcare professional in Ireland who has to show that a mistake or misconduct will not be repeated — in a response to a complaint, at the preliminary stage, under an undertaking or conditions, at a fitness to practise inquiry or when sanction is considered
- Regulator covered
- Applies to practitioners registered with the Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland or CORU
- Length
- 10 sections, 50 lessons, 2 CPD hours
- Format
- Self-paced, online, immediate access, twelve months from purchase
- Certificate
- Certificate issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses on completion, dated, with the course title and 2 CPD hours
- Price
- €100 · from €70 a course (Bulk Buy of 10)
Certificate issued by Healthcare Ethics CoursesRemediation courses for regulatory processes.
The certificate you will receive
How healthcare professionals use it
- With a written response to your regulator or its preliminary committee, alongside a reflection
- When an undertaking or a consent is discussed, or in your evidence to an inquiry committee
- As a dated record of remediation for the regulator when sanction is considered
Who this course is for
Asked to show it will not happen again
A letter, a committee or your adviser wants an assurance with evidence behind it. The course separates a weak assurance — a promise, minimisation, deflection, irrelevant evidence — from a strong one: admission, insight, targeted action, evidence and change sustained over time.
Facing a complaint to your regulator
The Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the PSI or CORU has written to tell you of a complaint. Your first written reply is where your assurance is first read, and the course gives it a structure you can follow under pressure.
Asked to undertake not to repeat the conduct
At the Medical Council’s preliminary stage a doctor may be asked to undertake not to repeat the conduct the complaint concerns. An undertaking is a commitment; the course covers the safeguards and the evidence that make it credible, and failing to comply with one is itself a ground of complaint.
Facing a fitness to practise inquiry
The complaint has gone to a Fitness to Practise Committee, a Professional Conduct Committee or a Health Committee. Remediation completed before the hearing, dated and documented, is evidence you can put before the committee and the regulator.
A concern raised more than once
A second complaint, a repeated error, a concern that has come back. Section 3 works through the risk factors behind a lapse — personal, competence, ethical and behavioural, organisational and external — so that your response deals with the cause as well as the event.
Under an undertaking, conditions or a sanction
An undertaking you have given, conditions on your registration or a sanction may ask you to show what you have done to address the concern. You receive a dated certificate for 2 CPD hours, and the course shows the other evidence that sits beside it.
The concerns this course speaks to
A promise without safeguards
I will try harder. It will not happen again. Section 6 sets out the characteristics of weak and strong assurances of non-repetition, with case comparisons from nursing, dentistry and social work.
The cause left unexamined
Fatigue or burnout, stress, a health condition, alcohol or drug misuse, a gap in knowledge, workload, poor systems, a blame culture, financial pressure. Section 3 covers each risk factor and why naming it honestly is part of preventing a repeat.
Dishonesty in records
Wound care not documented and the notes backdated; stock records falsified to hide an error. The course follows both from a weak response to a strong one, with targeted CPD, audited records and supervisor or mentor oversight (Sections 6 and 7).
Billing and financial concerns
False or inflated PRSI claims; costly treatment without the cheaper options. The course shows repayment, targeted CPD and six months of independently audited billing as a strong assurance (Section 6), and covers financial pressure as a risk factor (Section 3).
Professional boundaries with a patient or a colleague
A personal friendship with a vulnerable client; boundary drift that blurs the professional role, with a patient or a colleague. Section 7 follows a boundary case through transfer of care, CPD, reflective journals and quarterly supervisor attestations, and Section 9 covers keeping professional distance and declaring conflicts as daily habits.
Prescribing and clinical safety
Antibiotics prescribed without need; a medication error linked to fatigue. The course shows antimicrobial stewardship CPD, an audit of 40 subsequent prescribing cases and a double-check system as the evidence of change (Section 7).
Evidence that does not show change over time
A single certificate, a self-declaration, material unrelated to the concern. Section 5 covers targeted CPD, audits repeated over time, supervision and mentorship, and patient and colleague feedback; Section 8 how to organise and present them.
Keeping the change
A change that lasts until the hearing is over is not the assurance a committee is looking for. Section 9 covers non-repetition as part of professional identity: daily habits of reflection, accurate records, candour, boundaries and CPD, with mentorship and resilience.
Facing a complaint to your regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry? This course helps you remediate — and show it.
Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)What the course covers
Ten sections and 50 lessons, with a reflective quiz closing each of the first nine and a post-course assessment at the end.
Introduction — Why Preventing Recurrence Matters in Irish Healthcare
Four lessons
Regulator Perspectives on Non-Repetition — Medical Council, NMBI, PSI, Dental Council, CORU
Six lessons
Risk Factors for Misconduct and Mistakes
Six lessons
Reflection and Insight as Evidence of Learning
Six lessons
Remediation Strategies — CPD, Audits, Supervision, Feedback
Six lessons
Weak vs Strong Assurances of Non-Repetition
Four lessons
Case Studies — Demonstrating Change Across Professions
Six lessons
Presenting Evidence in Portfolios and Hearings
Five lessons
Embedding Non-Repetition into Daily Practice and Identity
Five lessons
Conclusion and Key Takeaways
Two lessons, Conclusion and Key Takeaways, and the post-course assessment
Show every lesson title
- Section 01 · Introduction — Why Preventing Recurrence Matters in Irish Healthcare
- Why Preventing Recurrence Matters for Patients; Why Preventing Recurrence Matters for Regulators; Consequences of Failing to Demonstrate Non-Repetition; Professional Identity and Lifelong Commitment.
- Section 02 · Regulator Perspectives on Non-Repetition — Medical Council, NMBI, PSI, Dental Council, CORU
- Medical Council of Ireland; Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland (NMBI); Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland (PSI); Dental Council of Ireland; CORU — Health and Social Care Professionals Council; Shared Regulator Themes.
- Section 03 · Risk Factors for Misconduct and Mistakes
- Personal Factors; Professional Competence Gaps; Ethical and Behavioural Risks; Organisational and Systems Pressures; External and Contextual Factors; Why Identifying Risk Factors Matters.
- Section 04 · Reflection and Insight as Evidence of Learning
- What Reflection Means; What Insight Means; Reflection and Insight in Regulator Assessments; Structured Models to Support Reflection; How Reflection and Insight Prevent Recurrence; Practical Tips for Professionals.
- Section 05 · Remediation Strategies — CPD, Audits, Supervision, Feedback
- Targeted CPD; Clinical or Administrative Audits; Supervision and Mentorship; Patient and Colleague Feedback; Integrating Evidence in a Remediation Portfolio; Weak vs Strong Remediation.
- Section 06 · Weak vs Strong Assurances of Non-Repetition
- Characteristics of Weak Assurances; Characteristics of Strong Assurances; Case Comparisons; Why Strong Assurances Persuade Regulators.
- Section 07 · Case Studies — Demonstrating Change Across Professions
- Medicine — Prescribing Safety; Nursing — Documentation Integrity; Pharmacy — Probity and Honesty; Dentistry — Consent and Transparency; Allied Health — Boundary Management; Shared Lessons Across Professions.
- Section 08 · Presenting Evidence in Portfolios and Hearings
- Reflective Statements; Organising Portfolios; Behaviour at Hearings; Using Evidence Effectively; Why Presentation Matters.
- Section 09 · Embedding Non-Repetition into Daily Practice and Identity
- Non-Repetition as Professional Identity; Daily Habits That Reinforce Non-Repetition; Mentorship and Role Modelling; Building Resilience to Uphold Standards; Lifelong Learning and CPD.
- Section 10 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways
- Conclusion; Key Takeaways.
How to show it will not happen again, in a response to a complaint or fitness to practise inquiry
Whether it is read at the preliminary stage, by an inquiry committee or by the regulator deciding a sanction, an assurance of non-repetition is read for evidence. These are the four parts to set out, and what the course gives you for each.
A promise looks forward; evidence looks back at what you have already done.
- The causeWhat contributed to the lapse, named honestly: personal, professional, organisational.Section 3 covers the five groups of risk factors.
- The insightWhy it mattered, and its effect on patients, colleagues and trust.Section 4 covers reflection and insight as evidence of learning, with the Gibbs, Rolfe and Johns models.
- The safeguardThe specific change that addresses the cause: a checklist, supervision, a new system, targeted CPD.Section 5 covers each remediation strategy and the difference between weak and strong.
- The evidence over timeAudits repeated, supervisor reports, feedback: proof the change has held.Sections 6 and 8 cover strong assurances and how to present them — and this course is a dated item for your portfolio.
An assurance that ends with I will be more careful has not yet started.
Take advice from your indemnifier, your union or professional body, or a solicitor before you respond to anyone.
Facing a complaint to your regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry? This course helps you remediate — and show it.
Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)How this course helps with a complaint or fitness to practise inquiry
Non-repetition is what an undertaking asks for
Under its 2025 procedures, the Medical Council’s Preliminary Proceedings Committee may ask a doctor to “undertake not to repeat the conduct the subject of the complaint” (2025 CEO and PPC Procedures). NMBI’s Guidance on Sanctions lists among mitigating factors “whether the nurse or midwife has taken remedial action where appropriate”. The course shows what turns an assurance into evidence: weak and strong assurances compared (Section 6) and five case studies across medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry and the CORU professions (Section 7).
Causes, safeguards and evidence
The Medical Council’s Guidance on Sanctions says that “a marked lack of insight and / or contrition” may be an aggravating factor. The course starts from the risk factors behind a lapse (Section 3), joins them to reflection and insight (Section 4), and sets out the safeguards and evidence that answer them (Section 5). For the stages from the first letter to the High Court, see the fitness to practise process in Ireland, explained.
Read the primary sources
- Guidance on Sanctions Imposed by the Medical Council (28 May 2024)
- Undertakings and Consents Guidance — Medical Council
- Guidance on Sanctions — Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland
- Fitness to practice — Dental Council of Ireland
- Disciplinary committees — Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland
- What happens when CORU receives a complaint
- CORU fitness to practise trends report (2022 to 2024)
Who wrote it
Dr Shehzad Iqbal
Course author and facilitator, Healthcare Ethics Ireland
Dr Iqbal wrote this course. He combines clinical practice with a formal postgraduate qualification in healthcare law and ethics, and has worked with registrants across the regulated health professions, online and face to face, since 2020.
He founded Probity & Ethics in the United Kingdom in 2020 and Healthcare Ethics Courses, which issues the certificates, in 2025. More about us.
MBBS · MRCS · MRCGP · Postgraduate Certificate in Healthcare Law and Ethics, University of Dundee
Written and reviewed by Dr Shehzad Iqbal. Last reviewed .
In short
Ensuring No Repeat of Misconduct or Mistake in Future Practice is a two-hour, self-paced remediation course for healthcare professionals in Ireland — registered with the Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland or CORU — who face a complaint, a preliminary decision, an undertaking or a fitness to practise inquiry and have to show that it will not happen again. It explains why preventing recurrence matters to patients and regulators; sets out how the five regulators’ codes frame it; covers the risk factors behind a lapse — personal, competence, ethical and behavioural, organisational and external; joins reflection and insight to evidence of learning; covers targeted CPD, audits, supervision and feedback; compares weak and strong assurances of non-repetition; follows five case studies across the professions; shows how evidence is presented in a portfolio and at a hearing; and covers embedding non-repetition in daily practice. Ten sections, the first nine closing with a reflective quiz, a post-course assessment, and a dated certificate from Healthcare Ethics Courses. It is remediation and dated evidence of it; it decides no complaint, and it is not a substitute for advice from your indemnifier, your union or professional body, or a solicitor.
Why the regulators ask whether it could happen again
Regulation looks forward. A complaint is about what happened; the decision that follows is about what may happen next. The outcomes the Irish regulators can reach include an undertaking not to repeat the conduct, conditions on registration, suspension and cancellation; each looks at what happens next as well as what happened. The Medical Council’s Guidance on Sanctions weighs mitigating factors and evidence of insight, and NMBI’s counts remedial action among its mitigating factors.
The course treats that reason as something you build and evidence: name the cause honestly, show you understand why it mattered, put a safeguard in place that addresses the cause, and show over time that the safeguard has held. A promise does none of this; six months of audits and supervisor reports does.
In a written response, name the cause, the safeguard and the evidence that it has held, in that order.
What these words mean
The three terms that decide where a complaint goes, and the words the course is built on.
- Preliminary Proceedings Committee
- The committee of the Medical Council, NMBI, the PSI and CORU that looks at a complaint before any inquiry: it may take no further action, suggest mediation, conclude the matter with an undertaking or a consent where its Act allows, or refer the complaint to an inquiry. At the Dental Council the Fitness to Practise Committee considers whether there is a prima facie case.
- Fitness to practise inquiry
- The hearing stage: before the Fitness to Practise Committee at the Medical Council, NMBI and the Dental Council, and before the Professional Conduct Committee or the Health Committee at the PSI and CORU. Any sanction heavier than an advice, admonishment or censure takes effect only when the High Court confirms it.
- Professional misconduct
- A ground of complaint under four of the Acts and, under the Dentists Act 1985, a ground for an application for an inquiry. The Dental Council describes it as a serious falling short in the standards expected of a dentist; the PSI as behaviour that goes against its Code of Conduct for registered pharmacists; CORU as any act, omission or pattern of conduct that breaches the Code.
Non-repetition, risk factors and the other terms the course uses
- Non-repetition
- Taking verifiable steps so that a mistake or misconduct is not repeated, and showing it over time.
- Risk factors
- What contributed to a lapse: personal (fatigue, stress, health, substance misuse), competence gaps, ethical and behavioural risks, organisational and systems pressures, and external factors such as financial pressure or digital risks.
- Weak assurance
- A vague promise, minimisation, deflection onto colleagues or systems, irrelevant evidence, or no verification.
- Strong assurance
- Honest admission, insight into the effect, action targeted at the cause, evidence such as audits and supervisor reports, and change sustained over time.
- Audit
- A review of practice repeated over time — prescribing, documentation, consent forms, billing — that gives measurable evidence of change.
- Insight
- Recognising why a lapse was wrong, its effect on patients, colleagues and trust, and the need for safeguards.
The Acts a complaint is made and decided under
Ireland’s five health regulators each work under their own Act, all five amended by the Regulated Professions (Health and Social Care) (Amendment) Act 2020. These are the sections that say who may complain, on what grounds, and who looks at the complaint first.
Medical Council — Medical Practitioners Act 2007, section 57
A person, including the Council, may complain to the chief executive officer. The grounds include professional misconduct, poor professional performance, a relevant medical disability, and a failure to comply with a condition, an undertaking or a consent. The chief executive officer looks at the complaint first, an Authorised Officer may gather the facts, and the Preliminary Proceedings Committee decides whether there is enough cause to take further action. Read it.
For this course: At the Medical Council’s preliminary stage a doctor may be asked to undertake not to repeat the conduct; Section 7 follows a doctor’s prescribing case through to audited change.
NMBI — Nurses and Midwives Act 2011, section 55
A person, including the Board, may complain to the chief executive officer. The grounds include professional misconduct, poor professional performance, non-compliance with a code of professional conduct, a relevant medical disability, and an irregularity in relation to the custody, prescription or supply of a controlled drug. A Preliminary Proceedings Committee, assisted by a case officer, may refer a complaint to the Fitness to Practise Committee for a sworn oral inquiry. Read it.
For this course: Sections 6 and 7 follow a nurse’s backdated notes through to a checklist and audited records verified by a supervisor.
Dental Council — Dentists Act 1985, section 38
The Council or any person may apply to the Fitness to Practise Committee for an inquiry, on grounds that include alleged professional misconduct and alleged unfitness to practise by reason of physical or mental disability. This is an application for an inquiry rather than a complaint: the Fitness to Practise Committee considers whether there is a prima facie case, and if there is, it holds the inquiry. Read it.
For this course: Sections 6 and 7 follow a dentist’s billing and consent cases through to repayment, audits and patient feedback.
Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland — Pharmacy Act 2007, section 35
A complaint may be made in writing by or on behalf of any person, or by the registrar. The grounds include professional misconduct, poor professional performance, the effect on practice of a physical or mental ailment, emotional disturbance, or alcohol or drug addiction, and a failure to comply with a condition or an undertaking. The PSI separates a concern from a statutory complaint, which is for issues of a serious nature; its Preliminary Proceedings Committee may refer a complaint to a committee of inquiry or to mediation. Read it.
For this course: Sections 6 and 7 follow a pharmacist’s falsified stock records through to independent audits and mentor oversight.
CORU — Health and Social Care Professionals Act 2005, section 52
A complaint may be made to the Council by or on behalf of any person, or by a registration board. The grounds include professional misconduct, which CORU describes as any act, omission or pattern of conduct that breaches the Code, and poor professional performance. The Preliminary Proceedings Committee screens out complaints that are trivial, vexatious, without substance or made in bad faith; the Professional Conduct Committee deals with conduct or competence, and the Health Committee with whether a registrant’s health is affecting their ability to practise. Read it.
For this course: Section 7 follows a social worker’s boundary case through transfer of care and quarterly supervisor attestations.
Also engaged: Sanctions — advice, admonishment or censure, conditions, suspension and cancellation (erasure under the Dentists Act): Medical Practitioners Act s.71, Nurses and Midwives Act s.69, Dentists Act ss.39 to 41, Pharmacy Act s.48, Health and Social Care Professionals Act s.66 · High Court confirmation — the heavier sanctions take effect only when the High Court confirms them; an advice, admonishment or censure on confirmation or once the appeal window of 21 or 30 days passes without an appeal · The 2020 Act — the Regulated Professions (Health and Social Care) (Amendment) Act 2020, which amended all five Acts in stages from 2021 to 2025.
What happens after a complaint reaches an Irish regulator
Each regulator has its own Act and its own names for the stages, and your letter tells you which stage you are at. At each of them the same three things are worth showing in writing: that you see what went wrong, that you understand it against your regulator’s code, and what you have changed, with dated evidence.
The complaint and the grounds
Anyone may complain, including the regulator itself. Under the Medical Practitioners Act and the Nurses and Midwives Act the complaint goes to the chief executive officer; under the Pharmacy Act it may be made by or on behalf of any person or by the registrar; under the Health and Social Care Professionals Act by or on behalf of any person or by a registration board. Under the Dentists Act the Council or any person applies to the Fitness to Practise Committee for an inquiry. Professional misconduct is a ground of complaint under the four other Acts and, under the Dentists Act 1985, a ground for an application for an inquiry.
The preliminary stage
The Medical Council, NMBI, the PSI and CORU each have a Preliminary Proceedings Committee. At the Medical Council the chief executive officer looks at a complaint first and may assign an Authorised Officer, and the committee decides whether there is enough cause to take further action. At NMBI the committee may refer a complaint to the Fitness to Practise Committee for a sworn oral inquiry, or suggest mediation or informal resolution; at the PSI it may refer a complaint to a committee of inquiry or to mediation; at CORU it screens out complaints that are trivial, vexatious, without substance or made in bad faith. At the Dental Council the Fitness to Practise Committee considers whether there is a prima facie case.
Undertakings, consents and mediation
A complaint can be concluded by agreement in some cases. At the Medical Council’s preliminary stage a doctor may be asked to undertake not to repeat the conduct, or to consent to censure (2025 procedures). At NMBI in 2024, 12 undertakings or consents concluded matters at the preliminary stage and the Fitness to Practise Committee recommended 32 (State of Complaints 2024). Undertakings were the largest single Committee of Inquiry outcome in the cases CORU concluded in 2022 to 2024: 13, against 7 censures (trends report). In 2024 the Dental Council accepted undertakings from a dentist instead of making a High Court application (Annual Report 2024). Mediation at NMBI and CORU needs the consent of both sides.
The inquiry
The inquiry committee is the Fitness to Practise Committee at the Medical Council, NMBI and the Dental Council, and the Professional Conduct Committee or the Health Committee at the PSI and CORU. At NMBI allegations against a nurse or midwife must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Medical Council inquiries are held in public unless the Council decides on a hearing in private or part private (Medical Council); CORU says its Professional Conduct Committee hearings are normally held in public and its Health Committee hearings normally in private.
The sanction and the High Court
Sanctions run from advice, admonishment or censure (admonishment or censure at the PSI and CORU) through conditions and suspension to cancellation, called erasure under the Dentists Act (MPA s.71, NMA s.69, Dentists Act s.39, Pharmacy Act s.48, HSCP Act s.66). The heavier sanctions take effect only when the High Court confirms them; an advice, admonishment or censure takes effect on confirmation or once the appeal window passes without an appeal: 21 days for doctors, nurses, midwives and dentists, 30 days for pharmacists and CORU registrants (MPA s.74, NMA s.72, Dentists Act s.41, Pharmacy Act s.50, HSCP Act s.68).
Interim measures and your first reply
Separately, the Medical Council says interim suspension is possible under section 60 of the Medical Practitioners Act 2007; where there is a serious and immediate risk, the PSI’s Council can seek suspension from the High Court; and the Dental Council may apply to the High Court for suspension under section 44 of the Dentists Act. None of the five regulators publishes a fixed deadline for a first reply: the Medical Council gives not less than two weeks to respond to an Investigation Report, and NMBI says you may request an extension of time. Take advice before you reply.
Facing a complaint to your regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry? This course helps you remediate — and show it.
Buy this course — €100 (€70 with Bulk Buy 10)Courses with the Ethics and Professionalism pair written to your own regulator’s code — for doctors, nurses and midwives, dentists, pharmacists and all other healthcare professionals, or every course →
Frequently asked questions
How do I show a regulator that it will not happen again?
Not with a promise. Name what caused the lapse, show you understand why it mattered, put in place a safeguard that addresses the cause, and evidence over time that it has held: audits repeated, supervisor or mentor reports, feedback. Section 6 compares weak and strong assurances, and Section 7 follows five cases through to the evidence.
Should I mention fatigue, workload or a system failure?
Yes, as part of an honest analysis of what contributed, not as the reason the lapse was acceptable. Section 3 covers personal, competence, ethical, organisational and external risk factors. Naming one shows understanding; offering it as an excuse reads as deflection, which the course lists among the features of a weak assurance.
What if the same concern has been raised before?
Then the cause matters more, because a repeated concern reads as a pattern. Deal with it directly: what was different the first time, what was not addressed, and what you have changed now. Take advice before you respond, because earlier findings or undertakings may be relevant.
I have been asked to undertake not to repeat the conduct. What should I do?
Take advice before you agree to anything. The Medical Council’s 2025 procedures allow its Preliminary Proceedings Committee to ask for that undertaking, and failing to comply with an undertaking is itself a ground of complaint. The course covers the safeguards and evidence that make the commitment credible, and it can be part of that evidence.
Can this course be used as evidence?
It can be part of the evidence, but no course decides a complaint. It gives you a dated certificate of 2 CPD hours and the structure for an assurance built on cause, insight, safeguard and evidence over time. What a committee reads is the assurance and the evidence that supports it.
Should I take advice before I respond?
Yes — before anything is written to the regulator, a committee or your employer. If you work for a public health agency, note that the Clinical Indemnity Scheme says it does not provide representation at disciplinary proceedings or before professional regulatory bodies. Whatever your profession, ask your indemnifier, your union or professional body, or a solicitor. Nothing on this page is legal advice.
How long does it take, and how long do I have access?
The course is 2 CPD hours, self-paced, with access for twelve months from purchase. The certificate is issued on completion, dated, with the course title and the CPD hours. Whether the hours count towards your own CPD requirement is for your regulator or scheme to say: doctors must undertake a minimum of 50 hours in each scheme year, and CORU registrants must achieve 30 CPD credits in every 12-month period.
Can I get a certificate with a later date?
No. The certificate records the date you completed the course, and that date does not change. If your regulator, an inquiry committee or an employer asks for recent evidence, you buy the course again: half price within twelve months of your original purchase, the full €100 after that.
Will anyone be told that I am taking the course?
No. Nobody is told you are enrolled. We do not share participant details with any regulator, an employer, a union or an indemnifier; the certificate reaches them only if you attach it to your own response.
Courses that work alongside this one
Preventing a repeat draws on insight, reflection and remediation. These are the courses that pair with this one.
Insight for Fitness to Practise
What insight is, how the five regulators frame it, weak and strong demonstrations of insight, and how insight is shown in a portfolio and at a hearing.
Reflection for Fitness to Practise
Weak and strong reflective statements, the Gibbs, Rolfe and Johns models, reflection against apology and justification, and the reflective portfolio.
Remediation for Fitness to Practise
What a regulator looks for in remediation, what a remediation portfolio contains, case studies across five professions, and remediation at a hearing.
Fitness to Practise for Healthcare Professionals
What fitness to practise means to the five regulators, the concerns behind a case, weak and strong responses, and professionalism at a hearing.
Dealing with a Complaint or Investigation Professionally
Responding to a complaint, employer and regulatory investigations, records and evidence, and protecting your wellbeing while the matter is open.
Rebuilding Trust of Patients, Colleagues, the Public and the Regulator
How trust is lost, and how it is rebuilt with patients, the public, teams and the regulator: insight, remediation and future risk.
Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals
Integrity, transparency and fairness, dishonesty set against clinical error, probity in documentation and billing, and weak and strong responses to a probity concern.
Ensuring No Repeat of Misconduct or Mistake in Future Practice
This course. Risk factors, weak and strong assurances of non-repetition, the evidence of change, and how to keep it.
Start today, finish at your own pace
Immediate access on purchase. Twelve months' access, a dated certificate on completion, and 2 CPD hours issued by Healthcare Ethics Courses.