GOsC investigation and remediation courses for osteopaths

Start from the concern as the GOsC has described it, not from the general topic you think it relates to. Read the allegation wording closely, then pick the row below that matches the behaviour or failing it describes.

Two courses are written for osteopaths: Professionalism and Professional Standards for Osteopaths, which works through the Osteopathic Practice Standards and what happens when they are breached, and Ethics and Ethical Standards for Osteopaths, which covers informed consent in osteopathic examination and treatment. Most osteopaths facing a concern take one of these alongside one course that addresses the specific failing. The full course list, grouped by concern and with buy buttons, follows this section. If you are still unsure, the which course do I need tool asks a few questions and suggests a starting point.

A health concern is different. Cases about a physical or mental health condition go to the Health Committee, and the evidence that matters there is medical, not educational. Courses can still help you reflect, but treatment and occupational health advice come first.

The GOsC publishes the guidance its committees use. Three documents matter most if you are trying to decide what learning to do:

• Investigating Committee Decision-making Guidance (April 2025), used when the committee decides whether there is a case to answer.
• Guidance on the threshold criteria for unacceptable professional conduct, which screeners and the Investigating Committee use to decide whether a concern is serious enough to investigate.
• Hearings and Sanctions Guidance (May 2025), used by the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) when it decides on sanctions and reviews orders.

The Hearings and Sanctions Guidance is the most direct about remediation. It asks the PCC to look for real evidence that you can look back on what happened with a self-critical eye. Acknowledging fault, apologising and showing contrition can all demonstrate insight, and the guidance asks the committee to keep in mind that people express insight differently across cultures.

The same guidance lists relevant CPD and courses you have completed as a mitigating factor, alongside good conduct since the incident, remedial action that addresses the concerns and steps you have taken to avoid a repeat. When the PCC considers suspension, it asks whether you have shown the potential for remediation or retraining. Training also appears inside sanctions: a conditions of practice order can require additional training in specific areas, or an independent test of competence.

Three practical points follow from this:

• Relevance beats volume. A course is mitigation because it addresses the concern. Ten unrelated certificates say little; two that match the allegation, with reflection on each, say much more.
• Repetition is the real question. The guidance links lower sanctions to isolated conduct that has not been repeated since. Your evidence should show why it will not happen again, which is what our risk of repetition course is built around.
• Some failings are harder to remediate. Dishonesty and serious sexual boundary breaches concern attitude more than knowledge, so committees look closely at whether understanding has changed, not only whether learning was done.

Read the current version of each document yourself, ideally with your representative. Guidance is updated, and the wording in force on the date of your hearing is what the committee will apply.

Courses are one part of remediation evidence. A useful pack for a GOsC committee usually has five parts:

1. Certificates of completion for courses that match the concern. Each certificate is issued in the name Healthcare Practise UK and shows the course you completed.
2. Reflective accounts for each course: what you learned, how it relates to what happened, and what you now do differently. Write these yourself. The reflective statement builder gives you a structure and prompts, but the words must be yours.
3. Testimonials from colleagues, practice owners or peers. The Hearings and Sanctions Guidance says the PCC decides how much weight to give them and considers whether the writer knew about the allegations. Make sure they did. The testimonial request generator drafts a request letter that asks referees to say so.
4. Changes in practice, such as a new consent form, a chaperone policy, a revised case notes template or an audit of your records.
5. Wider CPD and support, such as peer discussion, mentoring or supervision related to the concern.

Date everything and keep it in one place. A committee should be able to follow the story from the concern to what you did and why it makes a repeat unlikely. Our remediation pathway brings these steps together and produces an evidence portfolio you can print.

Healthcare Practise UK is an independent provider. We are not affiliated with, approved by or endorsed by the General Osteopathic Council, and our courses are not a GOsC requirement. No course, certificate or tool can predict or decide the outcome of a case. The Investigating Committee, the PCC and the Health Committee decide each case on its own facts.

Before you respond to the GOsC, take advice from your professional indemnity insurer, your professional association or a solicitor who handles regulatory cases. They can tell you what to say, what to admit and when to submit evidence. Our courses support that work; they do not replace it.