When a Profession Has No Shield, Every Arrow Lands
For years, I believed that being a good counsellor was enough — that if I practiced ethically, stayed current in my training, and held myself to high professional standards, I would be protected.
But the truth is more sobering: in New Zealand, counsellors operate without the legal protections afforded to most other health and care professionals. And when something goes wrong — or when a false complaint is made — there is no governing body, no legal status, and no statutory authority standing behind you.
Unlike doctors, nurses, psychologists, and social workers, counsellors in Aotearoa are not regulated by law. We are not recognised under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA). There is no requirement to be registered, no statutory body to defend us, and no consistent framework that separates ethical concerns from legal jeopardy.
Instead, counsellors operate in a grey zone — held accountable as though we were regulated, yet denied the protections that legal regulation is supposed to provide.
It is a silent crisis.
One that most members of the public don’t know exists.
And one that many counsellors don’t realise — until it’s too late.
When a complaint is made, there is no protective umbrella. The organisation you belong to — if you belong to one — is likely a voluntary body like NZAC or DAPAANZ. These groups offer guidance, peer support, and a code of ethics, but they have no legal standing, no power to intervene, and no ability to shield you from reputational or legal fallout once the HDC or media become involved.
This lack of structural protection is not just a problem for counsellors.
It is a problem for the public.
Because when a profession is exposed, unsupported, and vulnerable — the good ones leave.
The brave ones stop being brave.
And everyone becomes afraid to say what needs to be said, or do what needs to be done.
No Statutory Backing Means No Structural Defence
In New Zealand, legal protection in a profession typically comes from statutory regulation — being recognised under a formal Act of Parliament. For medical professionals, that’s the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA). For lawyers, it’s the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act. For teachers, the Education and Training Act.
These Acts do more than define eligibility and standards.
They create legal frameworks that ensure due process, enforce consistency, and protect professionals from arbitrary or one-sided treatment.
But counsellors are not included.
We are not recognised as health practitioners under the HPCA. We do not have a legal authority to advocate on our behalf. We do not have legislated protections, statutory appeal rights, or a governing body empowered by law to challenge misinformation, protect practitioner reputations, or intervene when investigative processes become biased or unfair.
When a complaint is made, the absence of this legal foundation becomes painfully obvious.
You are on your own.
If your organisation (like NZAC or another voluntary membership body) chooses to remain silent — or is sidelined by the HDC — you are left to defend yourself without institutional backing. There is no union-style defence. No protective legal designation. No statutory voice challenging the validity of the complaint or advocating for procedural fairness.
Meanwhile, the HDC acts as both investigator and enforcer, with the power to publish your name, destroy your reputation, and leave you without any meaningful legal recourse — even if the complaint is misleading, malicious, or fundamentally flawed.
This isn’t just an imbalance of power.
It is structural abandonment.
When a profession is treated as legally unrecognised but publicly prosecutable, you create a dangerous contradiction: counsellors are expected to meet high ethical and clinical standards but are given none of the structural support that makes those standards sustainable.
In that vacuum, the profession cannot thrive.
And neither can the public’s trust in it.
What Happens When Ethical Practice Is Not Legally Protected
Most people assume that when professionals act ethically, they will be treated fairly. But what happens when there’s no legal structure to make sure that fairness exists?
The answer is simple — and disturbing:
Even the most honest, principled, and well-intentioned practitioners can be destroyed by process alone.
Without a legal framework behind the counselling profession, there is no clear boundary between an ethical error, a clinical judgement call, and a criminal accusation. Investigative bodies like the HDC are free to interpret actions however they like, and without statutory protections, there is no mechanism to challenge misinterpretations or overreach. No mandatory mediation. No requirement to consider context. No neutral tribunal.
This creates a chilling paradox:
The more transparent you are, the more vulnerable you become.
Disclosing sensitive client details in context — even when clinically relevant and ethically justifiable — can be turned against you. Attempts to clarify nuance can be reframed as defensiveness. Speaking honestly becomes a liability. And suddenly, you’re not just explaining your decisions… you’re defending your character.
In one such case, a practitioner disclosed in good faith that a complainant had a known pattern of using complaints in response to perceived interpersonal conflict. The practitioner explained the clinical complexity of the situation, the therapeutic dynamics involved, and the ethical reasoning behind their approach.
Yet none of this context was meaningfully acknowledged.
No protection was afforded.
And no weight was given to the practitioner’s expertise or transparency.
Because in the absence of legal safeguards, even thoughtful and principled decisions can be reframed to suit a predetermined narrative.
This is the silent price of being an unregulated profession in a regulated world. You are judged by the standards of legitimacy — without being granted the tools to uphold them. It’s like being expected to play by the rules of the court, without being given a lawyer, a judge, or a jury.
When that happens, justice becomes arbitrary.
And professionalism becomes a risk.
Why This Matters for Every Counsellor in New Zealand
This is not just about one counsellor.
It’s about every counsellor.
It’s about the thousands of mental health professionals across Aotearoa who work tirelessly — often underpaid, often under-resourced — to support the emotional wellbeing of others, all while operating in a legal void.
It’s about early-career practitioners who are being asked to take on significant clinical responsibility without any structural protection if something goes wrong — or if someone simply decides to make a complaint.
It’s about counsellors in private practice who don’t have the shield of DHBs or corporate HR departments to defend them.
And it’s about clients too — because when counsellors are afraid to speak openly, reflect critically, or take necessary risks in service of the truth, therapeutic integrity is compromised.
The message from the current system is chilling:
Say nothing. Disclose nothing. Challenge nothing. Just survive.
This is not how ethical practice is supposed to work.
This is how fear-based practice takes root — quietly, gradually, and with devastating consequences.
When good counsellors are left legally unprotected, the field loses its best people.
When practitioners are told they’re expendable, many will walk away.
And when the public starts to see therapy as a risk rather than a refuge, everyone loses.
We cannot continue pretending that voluntary associations like NZAC or DAPAANZ are enough. They are important — but they are not legal protection. They cannot override HDC decisions. They cannot prevent a name from being published. They cannot enforce procedural fairness, stop reputational damage, or intervene in a public media narrative gone wrong.
Only legal recognition can do that.
Only statutory reform can fix it.
And until that happens, every counsellor in New Zealand remains vulnerable — not just to false complaints, but to a system that has no legal obligation to defend them.
What Needs to Change
This isn’t just a professional inconvenience. It’s a structural failure — and it demands a structural solution.
The counselling profession in New Zealand must no longer be left to operate in a legal vacuum. The risks are too great. The consequences are too permanent. And the current system, as it stands, is fundamentally unjust.
Here’s what must change:
1. Legal Recognition Under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA)
Counsellors must be formally recognised as health practitioners under the HPCA — just like psychologists, nurses, and social workers.
This change would establish legal clarity, introduce enforceable standards, and provide access to statutory protections that prevent procedural overreach and reputational harm.
2. A Statutory Body with Real Advocacy Power
The profession needs more than voluntary associations. It needs a regulatory authority — with legal standing — that can advocate for fairness, intervene when due process is breached, and defend counsellors against malicious or unfounded claims.
No counsellor should have to face a public investigation alone, with no structural backing, simply because their profession hasn’t caught up with the law.
3. Clear Procedural Rights for Practitioners Facing Complaints
When a complaint is made, the practitioner must have guaranteed rights:
- The right to a fair hearing
- The right to context being considered
- The right to timely and respectful consultation
- And the right to challenge findings without being publicly destroyed in the meantime
These should not be luxuries. They should be basic professional safeguards.
4. A Cultural Shift Toward Balance and Integrity
Finally, the culture around mental health regulation needs to change.
Right now, too many decisions are made behind closed doors. Too many reputations are destroyed without proportionate scrutiny. And too many practitioners are punished for being open, reflective, or imperfect.
What we need is a system that sees complexity, invites truth, and protects fairness — not one that sacrifices individuals to protect its image.
Until these reforms are made, counselling in New Zealand will remain one of the only helping professions where you can be publicly dismantled without legal standing, union protection, or a fair chance to defend yourself.
That’s not just a failure of process.
It’s a failure of principle.
For those unfamiliar with the background of my situation, I’ve shared the full story in this detailed statement:
👉 Neil Oliver Counsellor – The Truth Behind the HDC Complaint