Responding to Investigations – Part II: Insight & Accountability

In our April 2024 newsletter, we wrote about the importance of OTs responding to investigations in a measured and reasonable manner when recounting their version of events. Insight and accountability are equally important when participating in the investigation process.

Accountability for health professionals means:

• being responsible for the quality and ethical standards of their work,
• ensuring patient welfare, and
• upholding trust.

Being accountable requires a commitment to act with honesty, integrity, and transparency.

In an investigation, accountability means the OT responds by showing how they have upheld the standards and the values of the profession. If there is valid evidence that the standards and values have not been upheld, an OT’s insight and accountability become even more important. These factors are heavily considered by the Investigations, Complaints and Resolutions Committee (ICRC). It is the ICRC that makes decisions on every investigation.

The main function of the ICRC is to assess the risk and seriousness of each case. The degree of risk and seriousness affects the ICRC’s ultimate decision. The ICRC considers aggravating and mitigating factors—including insight and accountability—when they assess the case. If an OT demonstrates insight and accountability, this is considered a mitigating factor and can affect the outcome by making the terms of the decision less significant or strict.

There is certain conduct, such as abusive or intentionally dishonest conduct, that regardless of an OT’s insight and accountability, warrants the most serious decision from the ICRC—a discipline referral. The conduct is too serious given the significant harm caused to a client and, in cases of sexual abuse, the zero-tolerance policy for sexual abuse by regulated health professionals.

Insight and accountability signal to the ICRC the degree of correction a registrant may need to ensure similar issues do not happen again.  The ICRC may impose educational programs that vary in complexity to suitably address the concerns. For example, the ICRC could order an OT to take a comprehensive course on a certain topic and submit a report of completion or final testing. For less serious concerns, a shorter course—such as a 1-hour course that provides a certificate of completion—may suffice.

The College's mandate is to protect the public interest. It is in the public interest to ensure OTs practice safely and ethically. OTs who demonstrate accountability, show a commitment to continuous learning, and engage in self-reflection during the investigation process help ensure that an educational approach by the ICRC will be successful and improve the practice of an occupational therapist moving forward. 

Disclaimer: This article does not constitute legal advice. Registrants may wish to seek legal representation when responding to an investigation.