The Psychology Board of Australia introduced a new Code of Conduct (the Code) on 1 December 2025 updating the regulatory standard in a way that provides a practical risk management framework for psychologists and psychology practices.

Psychologists spend their time focused on assessment, treatment, client communication and record keeping, with practitioners thinking about complaints or litigation when undertaking those activities. However, when concerns are later raised by a client, and subsequently AHPRA, the HCCC, an insurer or a court, it is often those everyday decisions that come under close examination.

One of the central themes of the Code is that psychologists need to be able to explain and justify their professional decision-making. The emphasis on competence, communication, consent, cultural safety, documentation, supervision and reflective practice mirrors the issues most commonly encountered in complaints and professional negligence claims.

The strongest risk management strategies are often the same behaviours that support high-quality client care. The Code repeatedly emphasises effective communication, informed decision-making, consultation, professional competence and reflection. These are not merely regulatory concepts. They are practical measures that reduce misunderstanding, strengthen therapeutic relationships and support defensible decision-making.

When complaints arise, regulators and insurers seldom focus solely on outcomes. They frequently examine the process by which decisions were reached. Was the psychologist acting within competence? Was adequate consent obtained? Were relevant risks identified and managed? Was communication clear and appropriate? Were records maintained? Was supervision or consultation sought where required?

Informed consent remains one of the most important areas of professional risk management. The Code reinforces that consent is an ongoing process rather than a one-off administrative requirement. Clients should understand the nature and purpose of services, foreseeable risks and benefits, confidentiality arrangements and any limitations that may apply.

Consent should be revisited when circumstances change. A client who consents to treatment may not necessarily have consented to the preparation of a medicolegal report, disclosure to a third party or the use of digital tools within the therapeutic process. From a complaints perspective, documentation of the consent discussion is often more valuable than the existence of a signed consent form alone.

A recurring theme in complaints and litigation is the importance of records. A psychologist may have acted appropriately, but if the file does not adequately document the reasoning process, it can become difficult to demonstrate why a decision was made.

Good records do not need to be lengthy. However, they should clearly document consent discussions, significant risk assessments, treatment decisions, referrals, supervision discussions and the rationale for important decisions. Well-maintained records support continuity of care, facilitate supervision and frequently become the most important evidence available if a complaint or claim later arises.

The Code highlights the importance of supervision and consultation as safeguards for both psychologists and clients, especially as contemporary psychological practice is increasingly complex. Practitioners frequently encounter presentations involving trauma, risk issues, cultural considerations, family violence concerns and medico-legal requests. The most defensible psychologists are often those who recognise uncertainty, seek assistance where appropriate and work within the limits of their competence.

In many complaint investigations, the issue is not whether supervision occurred, but whether there is evidence demonstrating that significant issues were identified, discussed and managed appropriately.

The Code also places strong emphasis on cultural safety and culturally reflective practice. This expectation extends beyond awareness of diversity. Psychologists should be able to demonstrate that cultural, social, historical and contextual factors were considered when communicating with clients, conducting assessments and delivering services.

Compliance with the Code cannot prevent every complaint or claim. However, it can place psychologists in a stronger position if concerns arise. Many complaints ultimately focus on a relatively small number of issues: communication, consent, documentation, boundaries, competence, supervision and risk management.

From a civil perspective, compliance with recognised professional standards may also be relevant when defending negligence allegations. While the level of compliance with the Code does not automatically determine liability, evidence that a practitioner acted consistently with accepted professional practice may assist where issues arise concerning professional judgement, including the potential operation of the “standard of care of professionals” defence under section 5O of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), section 22 of the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) and section 59 of the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic).

For psychologists and practice owners, the Code is most useful when translated into everyday systems. Key risk management strategies include:

• reviewing consent procedures and ensuring consent is revisited when the purpose, audience or risk profile changes;

• improving progress note templates so that important decisions, risks and reasoning are recorded;

• maintaining structured supervision and consultation records for complex or high-risk matters;

• reviewing report-writing processes, particularly where reports may be used in legal, employment or insurance contexts;

• embedding cultural safety considerations into intake, communication, assessment and treatment planning; and

• having a clear complaint-response process, including record preservation and early consideration of insurer notification or legal advice.

These steps do not require practices to overhaul every system at once. Meaningful risk reduction can often be achieved through targeted improvements to the highrisk processes that are most likely to be scrutinised later.

The new Code should be viewed as a practical risk management framework as much as a regulatory standard. The same themes that underpin good psychological practice, namely competence, communication, consent, supervision, cultural safety, documentation and reflective decision-making, are also the themes that commonly arise in complaints and professional negligence claims. Ultimately, the strongest protection for practitioners is not simply a successful outcome. It is the ability to demonstrate that decisions were reasonable, professionally justified and supported by appropriate records and processes at the time they were made.

If the principles contained within the Code are embedded into everyday practice, psychologists will be better placed to provide safe and effective services while strengthening their ability to respond confidently to complaints, investigations and claims.