Grey Areas

As noted in part 1 of this article, Rebecca Allensworth of Vanderbilt Law School has published a thought-provoking book on professional regulation (licensing) in the United States.

Rebecca Haw Allensworth of Vanderbilt Law School has published a thought-provoking book on professional regulation (licensing) in the United States: The Licensing Racket: How We Decide Who is Allowed to Work & Why it Goes Wrong (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2025). While the approach in the US is different in several respects from that in Canada, there are lessons in

Hearing panels often make credibility assessments. Many times, the finding is based on the most reliable evidence even though no witness was “lying”. Events might not have been observed closely. Memories might have faded. Motivation might have tainted the witness’ recollection. However, sometimes one of the witnesses is simply not being candid.

From a public policy perspective, there is little consensus on how regulators of professions and law enforcement agencies should coordinate their efforts when a registrant is suspected of committing a crime. Despite some media articles in the past (e.g., related to lawyers and physicians), few regulators even have a published policy on the topic. The policies that do exist tend

There is general agreement that, even where delay in investigating and prosecuting misconduct allegations does not amount to an abuse of process, delay during the proceeding can have an impact on the appropriate disciplinary sanctions that should be imposed. However, there is less agreement on how that impact should be assessed.

Policy makers have long relied upon briefing notes to assist in making good decisions. Boards, councils and even committees of regulators have often used briefing notes to enable staff and preparatory teams to concisely convey the information that decision-makers need.