Regulating your Professional and Private Life
Attention Healthcare workers: Your personal beliefs and expression are not protected by the Canadian Charter, and your CAREER is at risk.
Following the Divisional Court's ruling in Peterson v. College of Psychologists of Ontario (2023 ONSC 4685), regulatory Colleges have clarified the scope of their authority to oversee registrants' public statements, including personal views shared on social media.
Recently, the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario (RCDSO) released an infographic offering further guidance to its members. It encourages dentists to "Pause. Think. Post"—advice we endorse.
The RCDSO's guidance reminds members, "Your professional, ethical, and legal obligations extend beyond your clinic or office. Inappropriate professional and personal online activity, whether you use your title or not, could harm patients and reflect poorly on the profession." This statement underscores that the RCDSO may regulate not only professional conduct but also personal behavior.
The RCDSO advises against engaging in controversial topics, suggesting that by choosing to practice dentistry, professionals should limit their engagement in potentially contentious public discussions. Dentists are encouraged to consider, “Would my patients feel comfortable reading this post?” and to avoid content that could be seen as offensive. However, determining what might offend every patient is difficult, given shifting community standards. We question whether a patient’s comfort in the non-professional setting should be a concern. While sensitivity in the clinical context is essential, we believe that a dentist's private, personal activities should remain distinct.
Our law firm represented the Association of Alternative and Retired Practitioners of Ontario (AARPO) in arguing before the Divisional Court that when a regulator restricts health professionals' unrelated personal lives—especially when they are not identifying as professionals—the College is exceeding its jurisdiction. We argued that health professionals should not be forced to choose between full community participation and their careers. While health professionals, like all Canadians, must adhere to civil and criminal laws (including anti-discrimination laws), we asserted that they should retain their right to freely participate in society.
Ultimately, the Court rejected our position, affirming that regulatory bodies have broad authority over their members' conduct, both inside and outside the workplace.