Complementary health practitioners disciplined for misconduct in Australia 2010-2016

Millbank, J; Kaye, M; Stuhmcke, A; Sibbritt, D; Karpin, I; Wardle, J

Complementary health practitioners disciplined for misconduct in Australia 2010-2016

Millbank, J

Kaye, M

Stuhmcke, A

Sibbritt, D

Karpin, I

Wardle, J

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of Law and Medicine, 2017, 24 (4), pp. 788 - 802
Issue Date:: 2017-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2017_JLM_Millbank et al_Complementary health practitioners disciplined for misconduct in Aus 2010-2016.pdf	Published Version	112.85 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Millbank, J https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8934-7945	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Kaye, M https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4484-1904	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Stuhmcke, A https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3679-7301	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Sibbritt, D https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3561-9447	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Karpin, I https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9326-3421	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Wardle, J https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8813-3542	en_US
dc.date.issued	2017-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of Law and Medicine, 2017, 24 (4), pp. 788 - 802	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1320-159X	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/123291
dc.description.abstract	© 2017 Thomson Head Office. This article examines disciplinary proceedings brought against complementary medicine (CM) practitioners in Australia at tribunal level since the inception of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law. The article looks at all 32 such cases and identifies trends in the kinds of misconduct established, and the orders imposed.These findings are compared with earlier and more sizable studies of tribunal-level outcomes for disciplinary proceedings against doctors in Australia and New Zealand. While there are some clear comparisons - such as the gender ratio of respondent practitioners and the most common type of misconduct, ie sexual misconduct - there were also notable differences. Specifically, the rate of removal from practice, either by suspension or cancellation of registration, of CM practitioners was found to be significantly higher than that reported in earlier studies of cases against doctors. More research needs to be done to explore the reasons for this apparent disparity.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of Law and Medicine	en_US
dc.title	Complementary health practitioners disciplined for misconduct in Australia 2010-2016	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	24	en_US
utslib.for	1801 Law	en_US
utslib.for	11 Medical and Health Sciences	en_US
utslib.for	18 Law and Legal Studies	en_US
utslib.for	22 Philosophy and Religious Studies	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/e-Press
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Public Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Law
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHSP - Health Services and Practice
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - HJ - Health Justice
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	4	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	24	en_US

Abstract:

© 2017 Thomson Head Office. This article examines disciplinary proceedings brought against complementary medicine (CM) practitioners in Australia at tribunal level since the inception of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law. The article looks at all 32 such cases and identifies trends in the kinds of misconduct established, and the orders imposed.These findings are compared with earlier and more sizable studies of tribunal-level outcomes for disciplinary proceedings against doctors in Australia and New Zealand. While there are some clear comparisons - such as the gender ratio of respondent practitioners and the most common type of misconduct, ie sexual misconduct - there were also notable differences. Specifically, the rate of removal from practice, either by suspension or cancellation of registration, of CM practitioners was found to be significantly higher than that reported in earlier studies of cases against doctors. More research needs to be done to explore the reasons for this apparent disparity.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/123291