Initial notification to Ahpra
Notifications about National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (NRAS)-regulated health practitioners (i.e., Ahpra-registered professions) are assessed by Ahpra and the relevant National Board in all Australian jurisdictions except New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland (QLD), which operate under co-regulatory models.
In NSW and QLD state health complaints entities may take the lead on managing certain types of complaints, particularly those related to service delivery and consumer rights. Ahpra only manages notifications that are referred to them by state health complaints entities.
In other jurisdictions, Ahpra’s assessment determines whether the notification involves professional misconduct, performance issues, health concerns, or other matters that could impact the practitioner’s ability to practice safely.
Refer here for a listing of NRAS-regulated ('Ahpra-registered') health professions.
Legal protections for notifiers
Under the National Law, individuals who, in good faith, make a notification to Ahpra are protected from civil, criminal, and administrative liability. This legal protection ensures that individuals can report concerns without fear of legal repercussions, provided their notification is made honestly and without malice. However, this does not protect a health practitioner from regulatory action in respect of their own behaviour.
Management of notifications
In states other than NSW and QLD, or when a notification has been referred to them, Ahpra and the relevant National Board directly manage notifications that fall within their remit, such as complaints and concerns raised about the health, performance and conduct of individual health practitioners.
The most serious notifications against health practitioners are referred to an appropriate tribunal in their jurisdiction.
Tribunals
National Boards refer allegations of professional misconduct to tribunals in each state and territory. Only a tribunal can cancel a practitioner’s registration, disqualify a person from applying for registration for a time, prohibit a person from using a specified title or prohibit them from providing a specified health service. There are a common set of findings the tribunals can make, but the specific arrangements for the tribunal are specified in the legislation of each state and territory.
Referral to Health Complaints Entities
In states other than NSW and QLD, if the notification involves broader issues, such as service delivery, patient communication, or consumer rights, Ahpra may refer the matter to the relevant health complaints entity in the state or territory. These entities are responsible for managing complaints that do not necessarily involve breaches of professional standards but still warrant investigation. They can also impose sanctions, including Prohibition Orders, particularly when dealing with serious breaches of the National Code of Conduct for Health Care Workers.
National Code of Conduct for Healthcare Workers (the National Code)
The National Code of Conduct is a minimum set of standards of conduct for all health service providers. Health complaints entities in each state and territory are responsible for implementing the National Code.
Complaints processes for speech pathologists
Role of Speech Pathology Australia
Complaints about speech pathologists are managed by Speech Pathology Australia (SPA). SPA’s regulatory framework applies to those holding the Certified Practising Speech Pathologist (CPSP) status (members and non-members), and other speech pathologist members. SPA’s authority does not extend to non-members without CPSP status. This limitation means that SPA can only enforce professional and ethical standards with speech pathologist members and non-members holding CPSP status. SPA handles complaints related to breaches of professional conduct, ethics, and practice standards, and can impose sanctions such as revocation of eligibility for CPSP certification, or suspension or expulsion from the association. However, these sanctions are limited to the organisation’s internal processes and do not have the same legal authority as those imposed by statutory regulators.
Role of health complaints entities
Complainants may also choose to file complaints directly with health complaints entities in their state or territory. These entities manage complaints related to broader service delivery issues, consumer rights, or breaches of the National Code of Conduct. In such cases, the health complaints entity has the authority to investigate and impose legally binding sanctions, including prohibition orders, that can restrict or prevent the speech pathologist from providing services under certain conditions or entirely.
Legal sanctions and the National Code of Conduct
From a legal standpoint, for CPSPs and other unregistered practitioners, the National Code of Conduct for Health Care Workers is the primary tool for imposing legal sanctions. However, the threshold for issuing a Prohibition Order by a state or territory Ombudsman or Commissioner typically requires egregious offences. The limited scope of accountability under the National Code contrasts with the more comprehensive oversight provided by SPA’s Code of Ethics for its members and CPSPs, which covers a broader range of professional behaviours and standards.
Legal protections for complainants
If a complaint against a speech pathologist is made to a state or territory health complaints entity, the individual making the complaint is not personally liable for any loss, damage or injury suffered by another person merely because of the making of the complaint.
However, the same level of protection is not afforded to those making complaints to a professional association, such as SPA. Complainants who approach SPA are not shielded from potential legal repercussions, which reflects the difference in regulatory authority between SPA and statutory bodies like Ahpra and health complaints entities.