Medical Council · NMBI · Dental Council · PSI · CORU · Complaint or fitness to practise inquiry
Insight for Fitness to Practise for healthcare professionals facing a complaint to their regulator or a fitness to practise inquiry
Asked to show insight, or told your response showed too little of it?
- Denial — the lapse denied or minimised, or described as harmless
- Blame — the error put down to a busy clinic, the system or someone else
- Impact — the effect on the patient, colleagues or public trust left out
- Records — a note backdated or a record falsified, and the dishonesty not admitted
- Boundaries — a boundaries breach with a patient or a colleague, explained as good intentions
- Fees — costly treatment recommended without the alternatives explained
- Evidence — a promise to try harder, with nothing dated to show for it
- Any other concern — about your insight, or a file that says it is lacking
Facing a complaint or a fitness to practise inquiry in which your insight is in question — before the Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland or CORU?
This course is for a healthcare professional asked to show insight in a complaint or fitness to practise inquiry. 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 asked to show insight — in a response to a complaint, at the preliminary stage, at a fitness to practise inquiry or when sanction is considered — or told that a response showed a lack of insight
- Regulator covered
- Applies to practitioners registered with the Medical Council, NMBI, the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland or CORU
- Length
- 10 sections, 52 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
Told your response showed a lack of insight
A letter, a committee or an adviser has said your account explains the lapse but does not show that you understand it. A later response can show it: the lapse admitted plainly, the standard named, the effect described, and the change dated. This course is written for that response.
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 insight is first read; this course gives it a structure: what happened, why it was wrong, what effect it had, and what you have changed.
Before a Preliminary Proceedings Committee
At the Medical Council, NMBI, the PSI and CORU the committee looks at a complaint before any inquiry, and at the Medical Council and NMBI a complaint can be concluded at that stage with an undertaking or a consent. The Medical Council’s undertakings guidance names the level of insight shown as one of the factors it weighs.
Facing a fitness to practise inquiry
The complaint has gone to a Fitness to Practise Committee, a Professional Conduct Committee or a Health Committee. The committee hears how you speak about the lapse as well as reading what you wrote; Section 8 covers insight at a hearing, and the behaviour that weakens it.
Facing an allegation of professional misconduct
A prescribing error, a backdated note, a costly treatment without the alternatives, a boundary crossed: the allegation describes what happened once. Your response tells the committee what may happen next, and the course compares weak and strong demonstrations of insight in five such situations.
Under an undertaking, conditions or a sanction
An undertaking you have given, conditions on your registration or a sanction may ask you to show that the concern has been addressed. Section 6 sets out the evidence that shows it — targeted CPD, audits, supervisor or mentor reports, feedback and reflective writing — and you receive a dated certificate for 2 CPD hours.
The concerns this course speaks to
Denial and minimisation
It was only paperwork. No harm was done. Mistakes like this happen. The course shows why a response that minimises the lapse is read as a sign it may happen again (Section 4), and sets weak and strong demonstrations of insight side by side in Section 3.
Blaming the clinic, the system or someone else
A busy clinic, a heavy workload, a colleague who did not pass something on. Named as contributing factors in an honest analysis, these facts show understanding; offered as the reason for the lapse, they read as an excuse. Section 5 has a lesson on identifying contributing factors.
The effect on patients, colleagues and public trust
Insight includes the effect of the lapse even where no harm followed: on the patient’s safety and dignity, on colleagues, and on public trust. Section 5 has a lesson on recognising impact, and the case studies show a confidentiality breach acknowledged as harm to dignity although no direct harm was caused.
Dishonesty in records
A wound-care entry backdated; stock records falsified to cover a mistake. The course treats the dishonesty as a concern in its own right, and shows the admission, the targeted CPD and the audited records that answer it (Sections 3 and 7).
Professional boundaries with a patient or a colleague
A personal phone number given to a patient, a friendship with a vulnerable client, a junior colleague belittled on a ward round. The course treats a boundary with a patient or a colleague as the same question of insight: good intentions do not excuse it, and the response names the boundary, the risk and the safeguard (Sections 3 and 7).
Fees, alternatives and financial exploitation
Costly treatment recommended without the simpler options explained. The course compares a weak and a strong response to it (Section 3) and follows a case of financial exploitation through to refunds, clearer consent forms and targeted CPD (Section 7).
A promise without evidence
A promise to try harder, or CPD on a subject unrelated to the concern. Section 6 covers the evidence that shows insight — targeted CPD, audits repeated and verified, supervisor or mentor reports, patient or colleague feedback and reflective writing — and why a combination of them is stronger than any one.
Insight at a hearing
Defensive, evasive or minimising answers in front of the committee. The course covers behaviour at a hearing as part of insight — tone, attitude and engagement as well as words — and how insight is presented in a reflective statement and a portfolio (Sections 4 and 8).
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 52 lessons, with a reflective quiz closing each of the first nine and a post-course assessment at the end.
Introduction — What Is Insight and Why It Matters in Irish Healthcare
Four lessons
Regulator Perspectives on Insight — Medical Council, NMBI, PSI, Dental Council, CORU
Six lessons
Weak vs Strong Demonstrations of Insight in Fitness-to-Practise Cases
Six lessons
Why Lack of Insight Raises Regulator Concerns
Five lessons
Developing Insight Through Reflection and Self-Awareness
Six lessons
Practical Strategies to Evidence Insight — CPD, Audits, Feedback
Six lessons
Case Studies — Insight in Action Across Irish Healthcare Professions
Six lessons
How to Present Insight in Remediation Portfolios and Hearings
Six lessons
Embedding Insight into Professional Identity and Lifelong Practice
Five lessons
Conclusion and Key Takeaways
Two lessons, Conclusion and Key Takeaways, and the post-course assessment
Show every lesson title
- Section 01 · Introduction — What Is Insight and Why It Matters in Irish Healthcare
- What Is Insight?; Why Insight Matters for Patients; Why Insight Matters for Regulators; Insight as a Lifelong Professional Duty.
- Section 02 · Regulator Perspectives on Insight — 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 · Weak vs Strong Demonstrations of Insight in Fitness-to-Practise Cases
- Clinical Error — Prescribing Mistake; Documentation Breach; Financial Misconduct; Boundary Violation; Workplace Conduct — Bullying a Colleague; Shared Lessons.
- Section 04 · Why Lack of Insight Raises Regulator Concerns
- Risk of Repetition; Damage to Public Trust; Failure to Learn from Mistakes; Weak vs Strong Behaviour at Hearings; Regulator Perspective.
- Section 05 · Developing Insight Through Reflection and Self-Awareness
- Honest Self-Assessment; Recognising Impact; Linking Reflection to Standards; Identifying Contributing Factors; Developing Forward-Looking Strategies; Using Reflective Models.
- Section 06 · Practical Strategies to Evidence Insight — CPD, Audits, Feedback
- Continuing Professional Development (CPD); Clinical and Administrative Audits; Supervisor or Mentor Reports; Patient or Colleague Feedback; Reflective Writing Portfolios; Integration of Evidence.
- Section 07 · Case Studies — Insight in Action Across Irish Healthcare Professions
- Medicine — Failure to Obtain Consent; Nursing — Breach of Confidentiality; Pharmacy — Dishonest Record-Keeping; Dentistry — Financial Exploitation; Allied Health (CORU) — Boundary Violation; Shared Insights Across Professions.
- Section 08 · How to Present Insight in Remediation Portfolios and Hearings
- Reflective Statements; Remediation Portfolios; Supervisor and Mentor Input; Audit Results and Feedback; Insight in Hearings; Integration of Evidence.
- Section 09 · Embedding Insight into Professional Identity and Lifelong Practice
- Insight as Professional Identity; Daily Habits That Reinforce Insight; Role of Mentorship and Supervision; Resilience and Ethical Clarity; Sustaining Insight Across a Career.
- Section 10 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways
- Conclusion; Key Takeaways.
How to show insight 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, a response is read for insight. These are the four parts to set out, and what the course gives you for each.
The lapse shows what happened once; your response shows whether it may happen again.
- What happenedThe lapse in plain words, admitted without a qualifying clause.Section 5 opens with honest self-assessment and three questions: what happened, why it was wrong, and what standard it breached.
- Why it was wrongAgainst the standard in your own regulator’s code, named by you.Section 2 sets out the codes of the Medical Council, NMBI, the PSI, the Dental Council and CORU, and Section 5 links reflection to them.
- What effect it hadOn the patient, on colleagues and on public trust, even where no harm followed.Section 5 has a lesson on recognising impact, and Section 4 one on the damage a lack of insight does to public trust.
- What has changedSpecific to the lapse, dated, and confirmable by someone else.Section 6 covers CPD, audits, supervisor reports and feedback — and this course is a dated item for your portfolio.
An apology that continues with but reads as a defence, not as insight.
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
Insight is weighed at the preliminary stage and at sanction
The Medical Council’s undertakings guidance names “the level of insight demonstrated by the Practitioner” among the factors it weighs, and its Guidance on Sanctions says a doctor may demonstrate insight by providing evidence of their understanding of the problem. NMBI’s Guidance on Sanctions adds that “Mere acknowledgement of the findings does not necessarily demonstrate insight.” The course shows the difference in five pairs of weak and strong demonstrations (Section 3) and in five case studies across medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry and the CORU professions (Section 7).
Evidence you can put in a portfolio
Section 8 sets out what a remediation portfolio holds — CPD certificates, reflective writing, audits, patient or colleague feedback, and supervisor or mentor reports — and why it should show sustained change rather than short-term activity. CORU’s trends report records a committee finding that “early admissions had demonstrated some limited insight”. 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
Insight for Fitness to Practise 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 or a fitness to practise inquiry in which their insight is in question. It defines insight as understanding your actions, recognising their effect on patients, colleagues and public trust, and taking responsibility for learning and change; sets out how the five regulators’ codes frame it; compares weak and strong demonstrations of insight in five situations; explains why a lack of insight raises concern; develops insight through honest self-assessment, contributing factors and the reflective models of Gibbs, Rolfe and Johns; covers the evidence — CPD, audits, supervisor reports, feedback and reflective writing; works through five case studies across the professions; and shows how insight is presented in a portfolio and at a hearing. 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.
What the Irish regulators mean by insight
Insight is the regulators’ word for understanding what went wrong and why — and showing it. The Medical Council’s Guidance on Sanctions says a doctor may demonstrate insight by providing evidence of their understanding of the problem, counts an apology to anyone affected at an early stage, and says a marked lack of insight or contrition may be an aggravating factor. NMBI’s Guidance on Sanctions says the insight of the nurse or midwife may be a relevant consideration when a sanction is decided. CORU’s trends report records committees taking account of a demonstration of insight alongside references and testimonials.
The course sets out each regulator’s code, and the themes it draws from all five: honest acknowledgement, the effect on patients and public trust, remediation targeted to the concern, and evidence that supports the claim.
In a written response, say what happened, why it was wrong against your code, what effect it had, and what you have changed, with dated evidence.
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.
Insight, reflection and the other terms the course uses
- Insight
- Understanding your actions, recognising their effect on patients, colleagues and public trust, and taking responsibility for learning and change. In the course: acknowledging what happened, why it was wrong, and how to prevent it happening again.
- Reflection
- The written analysis through which insight is developed and shown: what happened, why, which standard was engaged, and what will be different. The course uses it to link the lapse to the regulator’s code.
- Remediation
- The steps taken to address the concern, with evidence that they were taken: targeted CPD, audits, supervision or mentorship, and feedback.
- Minimisation
- Describing a lapse as smaller than it was — only paperwork, no harm done. The course treats it as weak insight.
- Contributing factors
- Workload, fatigue, poor communication or a gap in knowledge that contributed to a lapse. Named in an analysis, they show understanding; offered as the reason, they read as an excuse.
- Reflective models
- Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle, Rolfe’s model (What? So what? Now what?) and Johns’ model of reflection: structures for analysing an incident and writing a reflective statement.
- Remediation portfolio
- The collected evidence of insight and change: CPD certificates, reflective writing, audits, patient or colleague feedback, and supervisor or mentor reports.
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: The Medical Council’s undertakings guidance weighs the level of insight shown; Section 8 covers how insight is presented in a written statement and a portfolio.
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: NMBI’s Guidance on Sanctions says the insight of the nurse or midwife may be relevant to the sanction; Section 2 sets out the NMBI Code’s expectations.
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: Section 2 has a lesson on the Dental Council’s Code, and the case studies include a dentist’s financial exploitation of patients.
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: Section 2 has a lesson on the PSI’s Code of Conduct, and the case studies include a pharmacist’s dishonest record-keeping.
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: CORU’s trends report records committees weighing early admissions and a demonstration of insight; the case studies include a social worker’s boundary lapse.
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
What does insight mean in a fitness to practise case in Ireland?
Understanding what you did, why it was wrong against your regulator’s code, what effect it had on patients, colleagues and public trust, and what you have changed as a result. The Medical Council says a doctor may demonstrate insight by providing evidence of their understanding of the problem, and NMBI says that acknowledging the findings does not necessarily demonstrate insight. Insight is shown with evidence, not stated.
My response was said to show a lack of insight. What can I do?
Write the next response differently in substance: admit the lapse without qualification, name the standard it breached, describe its effect, and attach dated evidence of what has changed. Sections 3 and 7 compare weak and strong demonstrations of insight, and Section 8 covers the reflective statement and the portfolio. Have your adviser read it before it is sent.
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.
Can this course be used as evidence of insight?
It can be part of the evidence, but no course decides a complaint. A committee reads your account and what supports it. The course gives you a dated certificate of 2 CPD hours and a structure for a reflection that names the standard, the effect and the change; Section 6 covers the other evidence that sits beside it, from audits to supervisor reports.
Is an apology enough to show insight?
An apology is part of it. The Medical Council’s Guidance on Sanctions counts an apology to anyone affected at an early stage, and NMBI lists evidence of an apology among the mitigating factors. On its own it does not show that you understand why the lapse happened or what you have changed; the course shows what the response needs alongside it.
No patient was harmed. Do I still need to show insight?
Yes. The course treats a breach of dignity, confidentiality or honesty as a lapse that needs accountability even where no direct harm followed, and it treats no harm was done as minimisation. A response should name the potential harm and the effect on trust, then the change.
Does the course cover reflective models?
Yes. Section 5 introduces Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle, Rolfe’s model (What? So what? Now what?) and Johns’ model of reflection as structures for analysing an incident. The companion course, Reflection for Fitness to Practise, works through each model with an example in its section on reflective models (Section 4 of that course).
How is insight shown at a hearing?
In what you say and how you say it. Section 8 covers the behaviour a committee reads — defensive, evasive or minimising answers against respectful engagement, acknowledgement of seriousness and openness about what you have learned — and how your statement, portfolio and supervisor reports should agree.
I have been asked for an undertaking. Can this course be part of my response?
It can be part of the evidence. At the Medical Council’s preliminary stage a doctor may be asked to undertake not to repeat the conduct, and the Council’s undertakings guidance weighs the level of insight shown. Whether a course meets a particular undertaking or condition depends on its wording, so read it with your adviser before you enrol.
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
Insight sits beside reflection, remediation and the assurance that it will not happen again. These are the courses that pair with this one.
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.
Ensuring No Repeat of Misconduct or Mistake in Future Practice
Risk factors for a repeat, weak and strong assurances of non-repetition, and the evidence that change has been made.
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.
Ethics for Healthcare Professionals
The four principles, the Irish regulators’ codes, ethical dilemmas, confidentiality, probity, and ethics in a fitness to practise process.
Insight for Fitness to Practise
This course. What insight is, how the five regulators frame it, weak and strong demonstrations, and how insight is evidenced and presented.
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.