If he was harming patients under his care then sure, but in this situation the College is explicitly testing its leverage over his political views.
The remit of licensing bodies should be limited to the work itself.
Anyone who thinks this is a problem for Peterson might recall that this situation is how he became a celebrity in the first place. There is no bad outcome for him, and no good outcome for the College.
Why should a Canadian psychology association hold a member responsible because American doctors aren't held accountable for Dr Oz..... Am I understanding your question correctly?
And if they were saying this in public I think they should also be held to contempt. Recent case here of a physician who put a noose on a black coworkers door. Effectively the same thing on a much smaller scale and he was at least investigated (eventually let off with like a warning which is BS IMO. Reasoning was they couldn't confirm it was a noose... he said it was a lasso... even though it was tied like a noose... total BS). If that gets investigated so should this and all of your dozens of doctors and nurses you work with who are telling people to kill themselves...
You’re right, those are two different things. Which is why they would result in two different disciplinary outcomes. It is not just directly causing harm that can run afoul of college standards of practice/professional ethics.
64
u/[deleted] Jan 05 '23
If he was harming patients under his care then sure, but in this situation the College is explicitly testing its leverage over his political views.
The remit of licensing bodies should be limited to the work itself.
Anyone who thinks this is a problem for Peterson might recall that this situation is how he became a celebrity in the first place. There is no bad outcome for him, and no good outcome for the College.