Not Completing Jurisprudence Module Leads to Written Caution

Ms. B did not complete her mandatory Jurisprudence Module last year. She ignored the College’s attempts to get in touch and eventually ended up the subject of a Registrar’s Inquiry which resulted in a referral to the Inquiries Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC). The ICRC decided that her conduct warranted a written caution. Up to this point, the private practitioner with 10 years of experience had had no issues with the College.  

What’s the registration requirement?

Every five years Ontario physiotherapists are required to complete a 50-question, online module within a six-month period that reviews laws, regulations and standards related to physiotherapy―it’s called the Jurisprudence Module. PTs newly registered also complete it soon after they register with the College. It’s something done by most regulated health professionals in the country   

What happened?

In October 2011, every PT in Ontario received a letter and email notifying them that it was time to complete the Jurisprudence Module and the need to have it completed by April 30, 2012. The information was posted on the College’s website and mentioned in other College communications. At the half way mark, all PTs were sent a second reminder of the upcoming deadline and another reminder again on April 24, 2012. For PTs who had still not completed it by the deadline, each was emailed on June 29, 2012. This communiqué gave PTs a two-month extension to complete the module and required them to watch a Jurisprudence webinar before September 1, 2012. 

The Eventual Consequences

The College was surprised to have just over 100 PTs of the 7,500 plus who had still not completed the online module by the extended deadline. The Registrar sent a letter to each one of these PTs by courier on October 29, 2012, advising that this issue would be referred to the ICRC for review if the module was not completed by November 18, 2012. Sixteen physiotherapists were referred to the ICRC and the Committee ordered an investigation into their professional conduct. 

Reasons given for not completing the mandatory obligation were varied. Some said they did not think the Jurisprudence Module applied to them. While other PTs indicated that they did not complete it because they had not received notice of the requirement (notifying the College of any changes to contact or employment information is another important professional obligation that should not be overlooked). Others said they were travelling or just too busy.  

The Committee considered each case on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the PT had engaged in an act of professional misconduct. 

What happened to Ms. B?

When Ms. B received a couriered letter advising her of the investigation she contacted the College and apologized for not completing the Jurisprudence Module or responding to the multiple College communications. She said she’d been dealing with family issues and was travelling, and these were the reasons she had not completed the Module. She completed the Module immediately.

The panel took into account the mitigating circumstances and chose not to refer her to the Discipline Committee. The Committee saw her behaviour as a willful disregard for regulatory authority and ordered a written caution to re-enforce the seriousness of not meeting her professional obligations as a health professional. 

Ms. B was also advised that should she have a complaint made against her in the future, her entire College history, including not completing Jurisprudence and being referred to the ICRC would be considered.