Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
UK Co-Head Regulatory, Fieldfisher LLP, Manchester, UK.
Med Leg J. 2020 Nov;88(1_suppl):50-54. doi: 10.1177/0025817220947947. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
Health and social care regulators in their guidance to pre-registration students and registrants emphasise the importance of honesty and integrity. While the term honesty is generally understood, the meaning of integrity is less familiar, and for many years, there has been disagreement as to whether there is any difference between "dishonesty" and "lack of integrity." To explore the possible application of lack of integrity to student behaviour, we present cases that illustrate what might be considered to demonstrate a lack of integrity. As with other allegations, if there is to be a finding of fact then an allegation of lack of integrity and its basis need to be clearly set out in advance of any hearing. If the term lack of integrity is to be useful, guidance from the regulators will need to explain the meaning of the term. If, however, agreement as to the meaning cannot be reached, maybe the term "integrity" should no longer be a standard accompaniment to the term "honesty."
健康和社会保健监管机构在向预备注册学生和注册人员提供的指导中强调了诚实和正直的重要性。虽然诚实一词通常被理解,但正直的含义则不那么为人熟悉,而且多年来,人们一直存在分歧,即“不诚实”和“缺乏正直”之间是否存在任何区别。为了探讨缺乏正直是否适用于学生行为,我们提出了一些案例,说明哪些行为可能被视为缺乏正直。与其他指控一样,如果要做出事实认定,那么在任何听证会之前,就必须明确提出对缺乏正直的指控及其依据。如果要使“缺乏正直”这一术语有用,监管机构就需要对该术语的含义作出解释。然而,如果无法就该术语的含义达成一致,也许“正直”一词不应再成为“诚实”一词的标准伴随词。