Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Dutch psychiatry residents who are dismissed from their training program have the opportunity to appeal the decision. Those appeals are publicly available. This report explores the appeals of residents dismissed for unprofessional behavior. METHODS: The authors analyzed caselaw of dismissed psychiatry residents brought before the conciliation board of The Royal Dutch Medical Association and compared them to a control group of caselaw of dismissed family medicine residents. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2020, 19 psychiatry residents were dismissed for failing to meet the competencies of the CanMEDS professional domain and matched with 19 family medicine residents. Most psychiatry residents deficient in professionalism were considered deficient in their attitude, in reliability of keeping agreements, or in their ability to profit from supervisors' feedback. Insufficient professional behavior overlapped with insufficient communication, collaboration, and management. Half of the psychiatry residents with deficits in professionalism went on sick leave at some time. Between residents in psychiatry and family medicine, or between psychiatry residents with and without a favorable conciliation board decision, no statistical differences were found regarding gender, year of residency, and number of insufficient competencies. CONCLUSIONS: The deficiencies in the professionalism of residents who challenged their program director's decision to be dismissed mostly consisted of inadequate attitude or the inability to profit from feedback, suggesting that these residents lack empathy, introspection, or both.