University of Hertfordshire

By the same authors

The Legal Underpinnings of Medical Discipline in Common Law Jurisdictions

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


  • CG-AAM-1

    Accepted author manuscript, 258 KB, PDF document

View graph of relations
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)15-34
Number of pages20
JournalThe Journal of legal medicine
Early online date29 May 2019
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 29 May 2019


Medical regulators have a responsibility to protect, promote, and maintain the health and safety of patients. Here, we compare and contrast the processes for addressing concerns about doctors in four countries with legal systems based on English common law: the UK, Australia, the United States, and Canada. The legal provisions underpinning each jurisdiction's disciplinary processes depict distinctive outlooks from the different authorities as each works toward the same goal. The initial stages of the investigation process are broadly similar in all of the jurisdictions examined. Each process, however, has subtle differences with regard to its comparators. Factors include how matters of discipline are framed, the constitution of disciplinary panels, and how the perceived independence of these panels all philosophically affect the public safety remit of each regulator. This work constitutes the first comparison of international regulatory frameworks for the profession of medicine.

ID: 16867907