Does this provision unfairly prejudice previous offenders / not advocate the yellow ribbon movement?
Restriction on employment/engagement of certain individuals is to protect the safety and welfare of vulnerable patients.
This is done by preventing recalcitrant individuals, who can potentially cause hurt to patients, from being re-employed or re-engaged into such services.
Such restrictions are not new and also found under the Early Childhood Development Centres Act 2017 where the policy intent is to protect the vulnerable young.
MOH recognises that not all past offenders may be recalcitrant. Employers who wish to employ/engage restricted individuals may seek the approval of the DGH.
The DGH will consider various factors including the roles and responsibilities of the prospective individual, the nature of the past offence, the likelihood of the individual re-offending or committing similar offences, and the employers’ use of preventive measures, amongst other matters.
Related questions
What is the purpose of restricting the employment/engagement of individuals who have been convicted of egregious offences in the healthcare sector?
Why does this requirement only apply to prospective individuals and not individuals who are already employed/engaged by the licensee?
Do all prospective individuals who have occasional contact with patients (i.e., locum doctors and visiting consultants) need to abide by this restriction prior to their engagement with the licensee?
Are licensees themselves expected to conduct the background screening for prospective individuals to be employed/engaged by them?
