DOCUMENT ON COLLEGE FITNESS TO PRACTICE POLICY
1. Introduction
At present, fitness to practice cases are dealt with pursuant to para.19 of page H5 of the Calendar which provides:
“Issues with students may arise from time to time which, in the opinion of the Senior Lecturer, affect a student’s ability or suitability to participate in his or her course. If requested by the Senior Lecturer, students will be required to undergo a medical examination or assessment by a doctor or specialist nominated by the Senior Lecturer at College’s expense for the purpose of obtaining an opinion as to the student’s medical fitness to continue with his/her studies or as to his/her ability or suitability to participate in his/her course to the standards required by College.”
It is arguable, however, that a more comprehensive approach to fitness to practice issues is required (though para.19 or some variant thereon should be retained to cover cases in which students are unfit to pursue courses with no fitness to practice requirements). Decisions in this area have potentially far-reaching effects on students, staff and members of the general public and so it is imperative that proper procedures are followed in making such decisions. Moreover, decision-makers need to be aware of their statutory obligations in order to avoid the very real risk that decisions on fitness to practice issues might discriminate against students with disabilities – see ‘Maintaining Standards: Promoting Equality’, a report by the UK Disability Rights Commission, September 2007.
Since late 2007, a Working Group[1] has attempted to formulate a draft Fitness to Practice policy for College. This discussion document contains guidelines for schools and Course Committees on the content of school/departmental fitness to practice policies, together with recommendations on new College procedures for dealing with fitness to practice cases. It should be noted that adoption of this policy may necessitate amendments to the College Statutes. It should also be noted that compliance with College policy on fitness to practice does not relieve members of staff of any obligation they may have under their professional code.
2. Substantive elements of policy
College should require the relevant Schools/disciplines to address the following four questions as each School/discipline formulates its fitness to practice policy
· What competency(ies) is/are being assessed in the specific course/placement? Schools/discipliness should identify all competencies relevant to their discipline that have been formally approved by the relevant regulatory body and may find it helpful to list competencies under the headings of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Note that these headings are not exclusive so that a competency may be listed under more than one heading.
· Is the competency requirement justifiable in relation to each specific course/placement?
· How is the competency assessed? Some competencies may be assessed objectively using examinations (written or oral) or practical demonstrations. However assessing other competencies requires the assessor to make a subjective judgment.
· In the case of a student with a disability/specific learning difficulty, has the School/discipline actively engaged with the Disability Service, in accordance with the guidelines set out in Section 4 below, to determine how the student’s needs might be reasonably accommodated? (Note that the obligation to make reasonable accommodation arises once it is established that a student has a disability, even if the student is not registered with College’s Disability Service. On the other hand, a School/discipline does not have to make reasonable accommodation for a student with a disability if such provision gives rise to more than nominal cost considered in the context of College’s overall budget.)
The policy of each school/discipline should also refer to the statutory obligation to ensure that teaching and learning methods are accessible to students with disabilities and should give examples of how methods of teaching, learning and assessment can be made accessible to all students, while indicating that these examples are illustrative only and not comprehensive.
3. Procedures
Cases raising fitness to practice (FTP) issues arguably fall into three categories – cases where a student is deemed unsuitable to participate in a placement as a result of the outcome of Garda vetting procedures; disciplinary offences; and all other, non-disciplinary cases.
An important initial decision in relation to an FTP case other than those involving Garda vetting, therefore, is whether it should be characterised as a non-disciplinary matter to be dealt with by the appropriate proposed School Fitness to Practice Committee or as a disciplinary offence to be dealt with under College disciplinary procedures. Depending on the context in which the case arises, this decision should be made either by the head of department/school[2] or by the Junior Dean.
Where a member of College staff or work-based placement staff or other appropriate individual has a concern regarding a student’s fitness to practice, s/he should refer the student’s case, in the first instance, to the relevant head of discipline (or in the case of a single discipline school, Head of School). After consulting with the Junior Dean and, in the case of a student with a disability, with the Disability Officer, the head of School/discipline shall decide whether to refer the case to the Junior Dean to be dealt with under College’s disciplinary code or to have the case dealt with under proposed new procedures for dealing with FTP cases that do not constitute disciplinary offences.
Where an alleged disciplinary offence comes before the Junior Dean under College’s disciplinary code, either at first instance or having been referred by a Head of School/discipline, the Junior Dean may decide to have the case dealt with under proposed new procedures for dealing with FTP cases that do not constitute disciplinary offences if s/he considers this to be a more appropriate way of dealing with the case.
a) Garda vetting cases
Cases involving Garda vetting are currently dealt with at para.22 of College’s General Regulations and Information (p.H6 of the 2007/8 Calendar). This reads:
“Students on courses with clinical or other professional placements may be required to undergo Garda vetting procedures prior to commencing placements. If, as a result of the outcome of the Garda vetting procedures, a student is deemed unsuitable to attend clinical or other professional placement, he/she may be required to withdraw from his/her course.”
Cases involving Garda vetting shall be dealt with in accordance with College’s proposed Police Vetting Policy and Procedures once these have been adopted.
b) Other FTP cases
FTP cases that do not constitute disciplinary offences should be referred by the Head of School/discipline or the Junior Dean, as the case may be, to the School FTP Committee, subject to the proviso that where it is known that the case involves a student with a disability (whether or not the student is registered with the Disability Service), the School/discipline must comply with the procedures set out in Section 4 of this document before the case can be referred to the School FTP Committee. Where a fitness to practice issue arises in the context of an academic appeal being pursued by a student, Course Office based Courts of First Appeal, School based Courts of First Appeal, Faculty based Courts of First Appeal, the Academic Appeals Committee and the Graduate Studies Committee shall each have a discretion to refer that issue to the relevant School FTP Committee if this is considered a more appropriate way of dealing with the matter.The School FTP committee shall consist of three members of staff designated by the Faculty executive. Two such members shall be drawn from the School to which the student is attached and the third member from another School outside the Faculty with FTP requirements. Where the Faculty executive deems it appropriate, one of the School members may be substituted by a staff member of the establishment where the student was on placement.
In dealing with a concern regarding a student’s fitness to practice, the School FTP committee shall comply with principles of fair procedures. Where the School FTP committee decides that the concern is well founded, it may take any of the following actions:
a) Caution the student in relation to the matter
b) Require the student to undergo testing, at College’s expense, in respect of suspected drug or alcohol addiction. A student failing to comply with this requirement or whose tests confirm drug or alcohol addiction may be required by the committee to withdraw from his/her course or to go off books until such time as s/he is certified by an appropriately qualified person to be fit to proceed with his/her course of studies.
c) Require the student to undergo a medical examination or assessment (including a psychiatric assessment) by a doctor or specialist nominated by the committee at College’s expense for the purpose of obtaining an opinion as to the student’s medical fitness to continue with his/her studies or as to his/her ability or suitability to participate in his/her course to the standards required by College. Where a student fails to comply with this requirement, or where s/he is assessed to be unfit to continue with his/her studies or unable or unsuitable to participate in his/her course to the standards required by College, s/he may be required by the committee to withdraw from his/her course or to go off books until such time as s/he is certified by an appropriately qualified person to be fit to proceed with his/her course of studies.
d) Suspend the student until such time as s/he is certified by an appropriately qualified person, approved by the committee following consultation with the student, to be fit to proceed with his/her course of studies.
e) Require the student to withdraw from his/her course.
An appeal against the decision of the School FTP Committee should lie to a new College FTP Committee consisting of a chairperson who is a practising lawyer, 2 members of staff drawn from disciplines that have fitness to practice requirements and two external (i.e. non-staff) members, one of whom shall be drawn from the discipline of the student and the other of whom shall be a lay person. This Committee shall hear the case de novo and shall have the same powers as the School FTP Committee.
An appeal against the decision of the College FTP Committee should lie to the College Visitors.
A student appearing before a School FTP Committee or the College FTP Committee is entitled to be represented by his/her tutor or postgraduate student adviser.
A member of College’s administrative staff may be in attendance at meetings of a School FTP Committee or the College FTP Committee for the purpose of recording decisions made by such Committee.
c) Disciplinary offences
The Working Group recommends that disciplinary offences be dealt with through the established College disciplinary procedures – see Schedule II to chapter 12 of the College and University Statutes. Disciplinary offences include breaches or attempted breaches of the criminal law and of College regulations, whether committed inside or outside the College, including but not limited to
a) Activity which brings the College into disrepute;
b) Misconduct in relation to examinations, libraries and the use of other College facilities, services, and accommodation;
c) Disruption of the normal operation of activities within the College; and
d) Harassment or misbehaviour on College property or in dealings with others.
(Note that cases of student mental ill-health should not normally be dealt with under College’s disciplinary code – see s.43 of Schedule II to chapter 12 of the Statutes.)
d) Power to suspend
Where student behaviour threatens the well-being of patients, students or staff, the Head of School/discipline or an appropriate member of the work-based placement staff should have the power to suspend the student with immediate effect. The case should then be referred immediately either to the Junior Dean, if misconduct is alleged, or, in all other cases, to the School FTP committee. This is without prejudice to the power of the Junior Dean under section 43 of Schedule II to ch.12 of the Statutes to suspend a student with mental health difficulties where the student constitutes a clear and reasonably imminent danger to himself/herself or to others.
In relation to cases which fall outside the scope of the preceding provisions, it has already been suggested that the School FTP Committee (and on appeal, the College FTP Committee) shall have the power to suspend a student until such time as an appropriately qualified person certifies that the student is fit to proceed with his/her course of action.
e) Recourse to outside bodies
It is worth noting that students affected by decisions made under this proposed policy may, depending on the circumstances, have recourse to the Equality Tribunal or, if the Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill 2008 is passed, to the Ombudsman.
4. Students with disabilities
If a student has a disability, and there are concerns over fitness to practice, or potential fitness to practice, the guidelines outlined in this section should be followed prior to any fitness to practice hearing.
‘Disability’ is defined for the purpose of the Equal Status Acts 2000-4 and the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2004 as
(a) the total or partial absence of a person's bodily or mental functions, including the absence of a part of a person's body,