Dialogue Volume 11 Issue 1 2015 | Page 28

TRAnsparency Discipline. Cases that go before the Discipline Committee are already made public. Q&A Given that this proposal seeks to make cautionsin-person public, the intended audience is confusing. Is it for the physician to be more cautious in his/her practice? Or is it for the public to consider avoiding this physician? The primary audience for the caution itself is the doctor. A caution-in-person is used when the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) has a significant concern about conduct or practice that can have a direct impact on patient care, safety or the public interest if it is not addressed. The primary purpose for posting the fact of a cautionin-person, however, is to provide more information to the public. This information is intended to enhance the ability of members of the public to make decisions about their health care and to allow the College to continue demonstrating the accountability and effectiveness of medical regulation. Why should members of the public have to decide who is a problematic physician or not? The College’s mandate is to protect the public interest and it is a responsibility that we take very seriously. In all instances, the public must be assured that in instances of significant risk, we will take the appropriate action. For example, if serious concerns come to light, we will take steps to restrict a physician’s practice or refer a physician to the Discipline Committee. But we also believe that the public needs acc \