Unofficial
because it is possible the world is “awareness day/week/monthed” out. I do not imply awareness campaigns are not
important; we know some have made an incredible impact on the way humans
operate in the world. So why would I not
want to brand something as important as professional integrity in the public
domain? Because, ironically,
professional integrity is about trust in our fellow humans’ desire to have
professional integrity. Therefore, it
would seem patronising to insist one subscribes to a month of “professional
integrity” activities, when one must trust that we all act with integrity. It would be akin to announcing a month
dedicated to reminding humans what it is to be human. Ok, when I put it that way it does seem the
world may benefit – but calling it officially is saying “humans lack integrity
and are unaware that they lack integrity” which I do not believe is
definitively true.
A
“professional integrity month” may come with collateral damage: any group or
individual who didn’t participate, for example, do they have less integrity? Conversely, for the people who do participate,
are they so lacking in professional integrity they participate to get some? And do those who participate automatically
get to feel they have more integrity than others?
This is
sounding a bit cryptic. The key point is
professional integrity is in many ways subjective: a persons “integrity
compass” is shaped by their experience in the world. One’s “integrity” is their truth, and their
perception, analysis, interpretation and translation of that truth (based on
their own life experiences).
The
reason I am naming March “professional integrity month” is because I have been
exploring what professional integrity means, and I want to share what I have
found. And really, “professional
integrity month” simply means I will post one of the four articles each Monday
in March; I work better under pressure and with clear deadlines. However, the impetus for me to investigate,
and write about professional integrity was the appearance of the American group
“Dietitians for Professional Integrity (DFPI)”.
And it is with DFPI this four-part series begins.
The first
article is DFPI’s story; what DFPI mean by professional integrity in the
context of being a health profession and the public perception of the profession. The second article deals directly with
professional integrity. Wait. Lower your expectations here. My “deal with” is not a checklist of
behaviours….professional integrity, for the reasons in the opening paragraph
here, is rather challenging to put into words that mean something for our day
to day activities. But I’ve given it a
red hot go. The third article is my own
disclosure of interest. Disclosure of
interest and conflict of interest is presented as part of professional
integrity in article two; you will see across articles two and three the
inherent difficulties in being absolute with “professional integrity”. The fourth and final of the series compares
and contrasts DFPI with Australian dietitians offered as a starting point to
discuss the need for an Australian arm of DFPI.
Enjoy. @MDPStudy
Other blogs by me
[Series] Posts in response (prn)
Pete Evans
Dietitians
[Series] Trust in professional integrity (March 2014)
March is [unofficially] professional integrity month
The story of dietitians for professional integrity
What is professional integrity?
[Series] Are dietitians effective? (July 2013)
Heads up GPs, we can save $billions together
Pete Evans
Dietitians
[Series] Trust in professional integrity (March 2014)
March is [unofficially] professional integrity month
The story of dietitians for professional integrity
What is professional integrity?
[Series] Are dietitians effective? (July 2013)
Heads up GPs, we can save $billions together
[Other stuff]
No comments:
Post a Comment