Surgenor Lois J, Diesfeld Kate, Kersey Kate, Kelly Olivia, Rychert Marta
Professor in Psychological Medicine, University of Otago at Christchurch.
Professor in Health Law, School of Public Health and Psychosocial Studies, Auckland University of Technology.
J Law Med. 2020 Dec;28(1):165-178.
Disciplinary tribunals are deserving of review, in the interests of fairness, transparency and educational value for key stakeholders. New Zealand's Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (HPDT) determines whether registered health practitioners have engaged in misconduct that warrants discipline. The current study considers patterns regarding HPDT hearing processes and outcomes (2004-2020) (420 decisions), expanding knowledge from a previous analysis of HPDT decisions (2004-2014). The findings suggest that the HPDT has largely upheld its goal of consistency. However, shifts over time have included a reduced rate of appeals, and changing patterns for both the grounds for discipline and penalties applied. Differences in HPDT processes and penalties between medical practitioners, nurses and pharmacists were largely accounted for by the factors of practitioner attendance and legal representation at the hearing. This study contributes to understanding who transgresses, how they transgress and the penalties imposed. Such insights may be applied preventively for the benefit of all stakeholders.
为了实现公平、透明并为关键利益相关者提供教育价值，纪律审裁处值得进行审查。新西兰健康从业者纪律审裁处（HPDT）负责判定注册健康从业者是否存在应受纪律处分的不当行为。本研究考察了HPDT听证程序和结果（2004年至2020年）（420项裁决）的模式，扩展了之前对HPDT裁决（2004年至2014年）分析的知识。研究结果表明，HPDT在很大程度上实现了其一致性目标。然而，随着时间的推移，出现了一些变化，包括上诉率降低，以及纪律处分理由和适用处罚方式的变化。医生、护士和药剂师在HPDT程序和处罚上的差异，很大程度上是由从业者出席听证会情况和法律代表情况等因素造成的。本研究有助于了解违规者是谁、他们如何违规以及所施加的处罚。这些见解可用于预防性目的，以造福所有利益相关者。
