It’s Always Better to Tell the Truth 
PT Applies for Registration But Does Not Share Everything

The Situation

Sophia is a physiotherapist who graduated not so many years ago and worked in Ontario before leaving the province for a job in another part of the country. A few years later she returned to Ontario to work as a PT. Sophia contacted the College to inquire about re-applying to the College.

After speaking with the Registration team, she downloaded the application forms from the website, filled out the necessary paperwork and signed her name to a declaration stating that all of the information she disclosed on the forms was truthful and accurate.

However, what Sophia failed to reveal on her application was that since she had last practiced in Ontario, she’d run into some professional difficulty. She’d gone to Discipline Committee in her last jurisdiction and there was a finding against her. She had signed invoices for services that were not provided and had created false records that indicated that she had assessed patients that she had never actually seen. 

Sophia’s past conduct history came to the College’s attention when Registration staff attempted to verify the information she provided on her application. 

The Requirement

There were two issues to be considered. On their application forms, physiotherapists are required to disclose all information completely and accurately. Sophia’s omission on her application form was a serious oversight.

The second issue was what to do about Sophia's conduct history. Every physiotherapist who applies to be registered in Ontario must meet a good character requirement: Did Sophia’s lie on her application form and her conduct in the past jurisdiction make her ineligible for registration in Ontario? Could she be trusted to uphold the Standards of the profession if she was registered?

These issues had to be considered by the Registration Committee. 

The Consequences

After considering Sophia’s case and looking at the circumstances that gave rise to the discipline action in her former province, the Committee observed that Sophia was an inexperienced PT who had likely been taken advantage of by her former employer. However, they also noted that the onus was on her as the physiotherapist to follow the Standards and ensure that she demonstrated appropriate ethical and professional judgement.

It complicated things that not only had she knowingly engaged in unprofessional conduct in her previous jurisdiction, she had deliberately omitted her previous discipline finding in her application. 

The Committee questioned whether to register her at all. But, ultimately gave her the benefit of the doubt. They believed her submission that she was committed to making a fresh start and they noted that she had already paid the price for her unprofessional conduct through the discipline process in another jurisdiction. 

In the end, they awarded her a certificate subject to terms, conditions and limitations. Sophia was required to practice under supervision until successful completion of an onsite practice assessment; she had to complete ethics, business practices and record keeping courses within 6 months (at her own expense) and she was required to submit to the Registrar a paper about what she had learned through this experience. All of these conditions appeared on the Public Register when her name was searched.