"Good character" and the regulation of medical practitioners

In Australia and the United Kingdom, but not New Zealand, the notions of "good character" and "fitness to practise" are relevant thresholds to registration, deregistration and re-registration of medical practitioners, as well as in a number of other legal contexts. This article surveys different cultural and professional perspectives on "good character" and reviews the extensive case law which has interpreted the expression in relation to doctors' regulation. It acknowledges the conceptual shortcomings of "character" as a psychological construct, especially when it is postulated by way of a simplistic dichotomy between "good" and "bad" character. It argues, though, that the legitimate public expectation that medical practitioners adhere to high standards of ethical conduct justifies a requirement that they conduct themselves in such a way as not to diminish the confidence that members of the public are entitled to have in the profession of medicine and the trustworthiness of its practitioners. This can most effectively be done by replacing the concept of "character" with the requirement that a doctor be, and remain, "a fit and proper person" to be registered.