Jackie Drake nevertheless felt betrayed and blindsided when AHPRA reacted to her complaint. Her complaint? One of her doctors did a pap without gloves on. Drake’s complaint, which highlighted serious concerns about personal boundaries and hygiene practices, was one of many that have drawn scrutiny to AHPRA’s handling of regulatory matters in recent years. With such a grave background, AHPRA decided to take no further action against this practitioner. Today, the case doctor has agreed to wear gloves in all intimate exams going forward.
AHPRA hit back by announcing that 91% of the closed notifications it received led to no further regulatory action taken. This statistic should concern anyone who cares about the efficacy of this agency, their ability to address complaints, and their goal of ensuring nationwide patient safety. The commission works closely with Queensland’s Office of the Health Ombudsman (OHO) and works jointly with 15 registered practitioner National Boards. This relationship complicates the landscape when it comes to addressing health care complaints.
Drake’s case comes amid increasing concerns about AHPRA’s responsiveness to complaints. Complaints against AHPRA itself surged from 430 in the 2022/23 fiscal year to 691 in the latest financial year, indicating a growing lack of confidence in the agency’s ability to effectively regulate health practitioners.
A Disheartening Experience
Speaking about her traumatic experience under examination, Drake said, “I was just in shock and couldn’t do anything. She recalled a sensation of impotence as she fought to articulate her unease. I should have told him to stop, but I couldn’t say anything,” she cried. This horrible account highlights the need for always enthusiastic consent and respect for the patient’s boundaries by the practitioner during an intimate exam.
The details surrounding the incident raised red flags over a pattern of the doctor’s behavior. Based on AHPRA’s analysis, the physician’s treatment of Drake’s bodily autonomy was inappropriate. Even with this finding, he was never disciplined. It hasn’t gone unnoticed by Drake, who’s now wondering if the regulatory body is really serious about trauma-informed care. What does a practitioner have to do for it to be risky enough public? That is what she wanted to know. Her anger at AHPRA’s handling of her complaint was palpable.
Drake had strong words for AHPRA here too, accusing them of failing to offer appropriate support for complainants. “It was like a dagger through my heart,” she said. She was speaking, in part, to the absence of institutional support that often surrounds claims of misconduct. “I was never offered it,” she continued, and expressed her regret with the way her complaint was addressed.
Concerns Over Regulatory Timeliness
The timeliness of AHPRA’s investigations have come under scrutiny. Professor Marie Bismark made the important observation that inquiries typically conclude within a year. She acknowledged that timelines are able to lengthen out based on the intricacies or particularities of a case. She highlighted the pervasively slow timeframes for health regulators to achieve results. This postponement is a disservice to both complainants and practitioners in turn.
Drake further noted that the overextended timelines of investigations can place both officers and civilians in a purgatory-like position. Harm to the doctor, if it goes into effect, will be immediate and irreparable. Just like the patient or the complainant,” she said. This extended limbo can deepen the mental burden on everyone leading regulatory processes in the field.
AHPRA’s typical approach is to act on patterns of behaviour seen through several complaints. This practice helps to root out the truly egregious cases, the ones that are dangerous enough to warrant a risk to public safety. Drake thinks that given her experience, AHPRA should have done more. This failure to act on the submitted disclosure just deepens her rage with the agency’s hypertechnical procedures.
Patterns of Behavior and Accountability
AHPRA’s lack of accountability around the mishandling of complaints against health practitioners is, quite frankly, shocking. In one extreme example, it took five years for AHPRA to respond to an initial notification. They did just that when they finally referred a disciplinary matter to a Queensland tribunal against a doctor accused by more than a dozen women of improper touching and excessive intimate exams. This continuing delay has understandably caused many to question whether AHPRA is doing enough to protect patients from possible exposure to harm.
Drake expressed concern about the thresholds AHPRA uses to take any action. Like all of us, he’s curious about what it takes to take decisive action against a bad practitioner. It’s a tall order to put that amount of responsibility on patients’ shoulders,” she said. Patients shouldn’t need to keep themselves safe when they’re on the frontlines of health care.
As our own Professor Bismark passionately argued this summer, regulatory oversight works best when there is widespread collective action. “If other women come forward, if there are patterns of behavior, that can really help the regulator to take stronger action,” she noted. This ITV piece expresses the critical need for women to tell their story. Most importantly, it demands that regulators stop ignoring these accounts.
