Medical Council · NMBI · Dental Council · Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland · CORU · Complaint or fitness to practise inquiry
Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals facing a complaint to your regulator, a fitness to practise inquiry or an allegation of dishonesty
Your honesty is in question — in a record, a claim, a disclosure or a statement?
- Records — a note backdated, or a record altered to cover a missed entry or an error
- Concealment — a clinical error not disclosed to the patient
- Claims — an inflated or false claim, or a bill for work not done
- Misrepresentation — qualifications or experience overstated in a CV, an application or an advertisement
- Conflicts of interest — a financial interest in a referral or a product, not declared
- Disclosure — an account to an employer or a regulator that was not complete or accurate
- Plagiarism — CPD reflections copied from a colleague, or research data falsified
- Any other concern — that questions your honesty or integrity
Facing a complaint or a fitness to practise inquiry in which your honesty 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 whose honesty or integrity is questioned in a complaint or a 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 facing a complaint, an employer process or a fitness to practise inquiry that questions their honesty: in records, claims and billing, disclosure of errors, qualifications, conflicts of interest or confidentiality
- Regulator covered
- Applies to practitioners registered with the Medical Council, the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland (NMBI), the Dental Council, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland (PSI) or CORU
- Length
- 10 sections, 55 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
Facing an allegation of dishonesty
A backdated note, a falsified record, a claim for work not done. The course explains why regulators respond to dishonesty differently from a clinical error, even where no patient was harmed, and what a response then needs (Section 5).
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 honesty is read first. Section 7 sets out what a response should include.
After a clinical error that was not disclosed
The error itself may have been small; not telling the patient has become the concern. Section 5 covers why dishonesty added to an error escalates the risk, and Section 7 compares a weak and a strong response to a concealed clinical error.
Facing an audit or a claims review
A claims audit, a billing review or a stock check has found discrepancies. Section 6 covers probity in documentation, billing and digital records, and Section 7 compares a weak and a strong response to inflated claims.
Asked to show honesty at a hearing
The committee will weigh what you say about the lapse as well as the lapse itself. Section 8 covers why honesty matters in hearings, how regulators assess it, and the evidence that reassures them.
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. The dated certificate records 2 CPD hours, and the course shows the other evidence that sits beside it.
The concerns this course speaks to
Falsified or altered records
A late entry made to look contemporaneous, a chart altered to hide a missed dose. Sections 4 and 6 cover falsifying records and documentation integrity, and set a transparent late entry beside a backdated one.
Concealing a clinical error
A wrong dose or the wrong medicine, and the patient not told. Section 4 covers concealing clinical errors, Section 6 communication and candour, and Section 5 why concealment is treated as worse than the error itself.
Billing, claims and financial misconduct
Inflated claims, claims for procedures never performed, overcharging. Sections 4 and 6 cover financial misconduct and billing probity, and Section 7 a weak and a strong response to inflated claims, with repayment and independent billing audits.
Misrepresentation and false claims
Qualifications overstated in a CV, misleading advertising or applications. Section 4 covers misrepresentation, and Section 7 a strong response: the CV corrected, the issue disclosed, mentor oversight sought.
Conflicts of interest
A referral to a clinic you part-own, a product you hold shares in, recommended without disclosure. Section 4 has a lesson on conflicts of interest, and Section 2 covers transparency in disclosing them.
Honesty with employers and regulators
An account to an employer or a regulator that was not complete or accurate. The course names lying to regulators among the forms of dishonesty (Section 5), and Section 8 covers how honesty is assessed in fitness to practise processes. For a boundary concern, see the Professional Boundaries Course.
Plagiarism and research misconduct
CPD reflections copied from a colleague, data falsified in teaching or research. Section 4 has a lesson on plagiarism and research misconduct.
Digital honesty
An electronic record edited to hide a dispensing error, a misleading message. Section 6 covers digital honesty in records and messaging, and explains that altered electronic entries are traceable.
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 55 lessons, with a reflective quiz closing each of the first nine and a post-course assessment at the end.
Introduction — Why Probity and Honesty Matter in Irish Healthcare
Five lessons
Defining Probity — Integrity, Transparency, and Fairness
Five lessons
Regulator Perspectives — Probity Across Irish Healthcare
Six lessons
Lapses in Probity and Honesty
Eight lessons
Dishonesty vs Clinical Error — Why Regulators Respond Differently
Six lessons
Probity in Documentation, Billing, and Communication
Five lessons
Weak vs Strong Responses to Probity Concerns
Six lessons
Demonstrating Honesty in Fitness-to-Practise and Remediation Processes
Six lessons
Embedding Probity into Professional Identity and Resilience
Six lessons
Conclusion and Key Takeaways
Two lessons, Conclusion and Key Takeaways, and the post-course assessment
Show every lesson title
- Section 01 · Introduction — Why Probity and Honesty Matter in Irish Healthcare
- What Probity Means in Healthcare; Why Regulators Prioritise Honesty; Honesty as Professional Identity; Consequences of Dishonesty; Why Probity Matters Today.
- Section 02 · Defining Probity — Integrity, Transparency, and Fairness
- Integrity — Doing the Right Thing, Even When Unobserved; Transparency — Openness in Actions and Communication; Fairness — Equity and Justice in Care; Probity in Everyday Practice; Why Probity Builds Public Trust.
- Section 03 · Regulator Perspectives — Probity Across Irish Healthcare
- 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 04 · Lapses in Probity and Honesty
- Falsifying or Altering Records; Concealing Clinical Errors; Financial Misconduct; Misrepresentation and False Claims; Breaches of Confidentiality for Personal Gain; Plagiarism or Research Misconduct; Conflicts of Interest; Consequences of Lapses in Probity.
- Section 05 · Dishonesty vs Clinical Error — Why Regulators Respond Differently
- Nature of Clinical Errors; Nature of Dishonesty; Why Dishonesty is Treated More Harshly; Dishonesty + Error = Escalated Risk; Learning from Both Errors and Dishonesty; Practical Lessons for Professionals.
- Section 06 · Probity in Documentation, Billing, and Communication
- Documentation Integrity; Billing and Financial Probity; Communication and Candour; Digital Honesty in Records and Messaging; Practical Safeguards for Probity.
- Section 07 · Weak vs Strong Responses to Probity Concerns
- Documentation Falsification; Concealed Clinical Error; Financial Misconduct; Misrepresentation of Qualifications; Confidentiality Breach; Key Lessons Across Cases.
- Section 08 · Demonstrating Honesty in Fitness-to-Practise and Remediation Processes
- Why Honesty Matters in Hearings; How Honesty is Assessed by Regulators; Weak vs Strong Demonstrations; Evidence That Reassures Regulators; Building a Remediation Portfolio; Long-Term Monitoring.
- Section 09 · Embedding Probity into Professional Identity and Resilience
- Probity as Professional Identity; Daily Habits That Reinforce Probity; Reflection and Accountability as Routine Practice; Building Resilience to Uphold Probity; Mentorship and Role Modelling; Sustaining Probity Across a Career.
- Section 10 · Conclusion and Key Takeaways
- Conclusion; Key Takeaways.
How to respond to a probity complaint or fitness to practise inquiry
Whether it is read by your employer, a preliminary committee or an inquiry committee, a response to a probity concern is read for honesty first. These are the four parts to set out, and what the course gives you for each.
In a probity case the response is itself evidence of honesty, or of its absence.
- AdmissionWhat you did, admitted plainly, without it was only paperwork or no harm was caused.Section 7 sets weak and strong responses side by side in five probity cases.
- The standard breachedNamed by you, in your own regulator’s code.Section 3 applies probity to each profession — doctors, nurses and midwives, pharmacists, dentists and the CORU professions — with an example for each.
- The effectOn patients, colleagues and public trust, even where no harm followed.Section 8 covers how honesty is assessed, including awareness of the consequences for patients, colleagues and public trust.
- Verifiable changeTargeted CPD, audits, supervisor attestations, and repayment where money was involved.Section 8 covers the remediation portfolio and the evidence that reassures — and this course is a dated item for it.
An apology without evidence of change gives the committee nothing to verify.
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
Dishonesty is a theme of the cases
In the cases CORU concluded in 2022 to 2024, personal and professional conduct including dishonesty was a theme in 49%, the largest of the themes recorded (trends report). NMBI lists fraud or criminal matters among its categories of alleged conduct (State of Complaints 2024), and “Be Open and Honest” is one of the seven principles of the PSI Code of Conduct. The course covers lapses in probity (Section 4), why dishonesty is treated differently from clinical error (Section 5), and probity in documentation, billing and communication (Section 6).
Honesty in the response
The Medical Council’s Guidance on Sanctions counts “an apology to anyone affected at an early stage” in a doctor’s insight, and NMBI’s Guidance on Sanctions lists “acknowledgement and early admission” among mitigating factors. The sanctions available include censure with a fine of up to €5,000 for doctors (MPA s.71) and €2,000 for nurses and midwives (NMA s.69). Section 8 covers demonstrating honesty in fitness to practise and remediation processes. For the stages from the first letter to the High Court, see the fitness to practise process in Ireland, explained.
Read the primary sources
- CORU fitness to practise trends report (2022 to 2024)
- State of Complaints 2024 — NMBI
- Code of Conduct for pharmacists — Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland
- Guidance on Sanctions Imposed by the Medical Council (28 May 2024)
- Guidance on Sanctions — Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland
- Medical Practitioners Act 2007, section 71 — sanctions
- Nurses and Midwives Act 2011, section 69 — sanctions
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
Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals 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 or a fitness to practise inquiry in which their honesty or integrity is questioned. It defines probity as integrity, transparency and fairness; applies it to doctors, nurses and midwives, pharmacists, dentists and the CORU professions; covers lapses in probity, from falsified records and concealed errors to financial misconduct, misrepresentation, conflicts of interest and plagiarism; explains why dishonesty is treated differently from clinical error; covers probity in documentation, billing, communication and digital records; compares weak and strong responses in five probity cases; shows how honesty is demonstrated in fitness to practise and remediation processes and what a remediation portfolio holds; and covers embedding probity in professional identity. 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 probity means in Irish healthcare regulation
Probity means acting with integrity, fairness and transparency in all professional matters — clinical, administrative and financial. That is the course’s definition (Section 1), and it reaches beyond telling the truth: integrity when no one is watching, transparency in records, billing and the disclosure of errors or conflicts of interest, and fairness to every patient (Section 2). It covers patient care, documentation, billing, communication and digital conduct.
The course explains why a regulator responds to dishonesty differently from a clinical error: an error can be unintended and remediable once disclosed and analysed, while dishonesty is a choice, and a professional who conceals once may conceal again (Section 5). Where dishonesty is found, it sets out what rebuilds trust: honest admission, insight, and evidence of change that someone else can verify (Sections 7 and 8).
In a written response, admit what you did without qualification, name the standard it breached, describe its effect on trust, and attach verifiable evidence of change.
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 the Medical Practitioners, Nurses and Midwives, Pharmacy and Health and Social Care Professionals Acts, and a ground for an application for an inquiry under the Dentists Act. 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.
Probity, candour and the other terms the course uses
- Probity
- Acting with integrity, fairness and transparency in all professional matters: clinical, administrative and financial.
- Integrity
- Aligning behaviour with ethical standards consistently, including when no one is watching.
- Transparency
- Openness in documentation, communication, billing, and the disclosure of errors or conflicts of interest.
- Candour
- Telling the patient when something has gone wrong, truthfully and promptly. Since 26 September 2024, open disclosure of a notifiable incident has been required by law.
- Late entry
- A record added after the event and marked as late, with the time made clear. The course contrasts it with a backdated entry made to look contemporaneous.
- Conflict of interest
- A personal or financial interest that could influence patient care, such as a referral to a service you own. The course treats a hidden conflict as a breach of probity.
- Misrepresentation
- Misleading information in advertising, research or professional applications, including overstated qualifications.
- Remediation portfolio
- The collected evidence of honesty and change: reflective statements, targeted CPD certificates, audit or compliance results, mentor or supervisor attestations, and feedback from patients or colleagues.
- Backdating
- Making a late record look contemporaneous; the course treats it as dishonesty (Sections 6 and 7).
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: Section 3 applies probity to doctors, and Section 7 compares a weak and a strong response to a concealed prescribing error.
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: Section 3 covers honesty in records and handovers for nurses and midwives, and Section 7 a weak and a strong response to backdated notes.
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. 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 3 covers honesty in treatment planning and cost communication for dentists, and Section 7 a response to inflated PRSI claims.
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 3 covers accurate stock and controlled drug records for pharmacists, and Section 7 a response to a confidentiality breach.
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 dishonesty within the largest theme of concluded cases; Section 7 covers a response to misrepresented qualifications.
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, 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
Why is dishonesty treated differently from a clinical error?
The course explains it through intent, accountability and trust: an error can be unintended and remediable once disclosed and analysed, while dishonesty is a choice, and a professional who conceals may conceal again. When an error is compounded by dishonesty, the risk escalates. Section 5 covers the distinction and what each needs by way of remediation.
I backdated a note. What should my response say?
That you backdated it, why that breached honesty and accountability under your regulator’s code, and what you have done since. Section 7 sets a weak response (it was only paperwork) beside a strong one: the lapse admitted, targeted CPD, a checklist introduced, supervisor audits confirming the change. Take advice before you write it.
No patient was harmed. Is it still serious?
The course is clear that dishonesty is treated as a serious matter even where no patient was harmed, because it undermines the trust that care depends on. A response that relies on no harm was caused reads as minimisation; the course shows the alternative (Sections 1 and 7).
Money was involved. Should I repay it?
The course treats repayment as part of a strong response to financial misconduct: in its example, the funds are repaid, targeted CPD completed and independent billing audits arranged (Section 7). Ask your adviser how and when to do it, and keep a record. For billing, claims and conflicts of interest in more depth, see Financial Integrity for Healthcare Professionals.
Should I take advice before I respond?
Yes — before anything is written to the regulator, a committee or your employer. Ask your indemnifier, your union or professional body, or a solicitor to read your response before it is sent, and keep a copy of everything you send. Nothing on this page is legal advice.
Can this course be used as evidence of remediation?
It can be part of the evidence, but no course decides a complaint. It gives you a dated certificate of 2 CPD hours. Section 8 covers the remediation portfolio around it: reflective statements, targeted CPD, audit or compliance results, mentor or supervisor attestations, and feedback from patients or colleagues.
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
A probity concern can involve records, money and candour together. These are the courses that pair with this one.
Financial Integrity for Healthcare Professionals
Billing, fees and claims, conflicts of interest, gifts and sponsorship, prescribing and referrals, and remediation after a financial concern.
Documentation for Healthcare Professionals
Good clinical documentation, consent and capacity, handover records, digital records and data protection, and records during a complaint.
Duty of Candour for Healthcare Professionals
When the duty applies, talking with patients and families after an adverse event, and candour during complaints and reviews.
Professional Ethics Course
Probity, boundaries and conflicts of interest, digital professionalism, weak and strong demonstrations of professional ethics, and ethical portfolios.
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.
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.
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.
Probity and Honesty for Healthcare Professionals
This course. Integrity, transparency and fairness, dishonesty set against clinical error, probity in documentation and billing, and weak and strong responses to a probity concern.
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.