Code of Professional Conduct

We aspire to become a community that provides unparalleled care to any individual that is in need. By joining the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, we have assumed a trust in one another that is founded on honesty, integrity, and three core tenets which undergird the nature of our profession. These core tenets are:

• Every individual is equally worthy of our time, attention, and best effort.
• All we learn is to be employed in the service of others.
• We respect those who have dedicated themselves to teaching us.

In fulfilling these tenets, we acknowledge that:

• We are accountable for thoughts and actions incongruous with our profession.
• We will hold each other accountable for thoughts and actions incongruous with our profession.
• We are peers whose cultures, perspectives, and knowledge are all respected.
• We will never characterize anyone as lesser than another.

Every member of the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences community can thrive knowing that we aspire to build an equitable, trusting environment with honor and integrity at its core. The Code of Professional Conduct establishes the minimum that we expect of ourselves and one another as our careers advance.

The following are expected as the minimum standards of professional behavior in our clinical responsibilities:

1. We will treat our patients with the utmost respect.
   • a. We aspire to never treat a patient differently on the basis of any protected class or characteristic.
   • b. We seek to build a culture where conscious, habitual confrontation of our biases is used to improve the care we provide to patients.
   • c. To the best of our ability we will ensure the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual safety of our patients by using non-threatening, non-sexual, and non-judgmental language and behaviors in their care.
   • d. We will protect the modesty of our patients to the best of our abilities.
   • e. We will never make sexual advances towards any patient or family member.
   • f. We will keep patient information confidential in concordance with our conscience and the law.
2. We will respect the wisdom and knowledge of our teachers.
   • a. It is with the greatest humility that we have the opportunity to join the ranks of physicians long before us, and we will acknowledge the knowledge and efforts of those who have built this great profession.
3. We will complete our clinical responsibilities with honesty and integrity.
   • a. We are learning and will honestly state when we do not have the ability to appropriately complete our clinical responsibilities.
   • b. We will only provide care and guidance to patients that is appropriate to our level of education.
   • c. We will not complete any of our clinical responsibilities impaired by alcohol, prescription medications, or other non-prescribed drugs.
   • d. We will not complete any of our clinical responsibilities impaired by severe fatigue.
   • e. We will always give our best.
   • f. We will not plagiarize.
   • g. We will not lie.
4. The hospitals and clinics we practice in have opened their doors to us as physicians-in-training and we will respect their rules, regulations, and property.

At the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, the following are expected as the minimum standards of professional behavior in our academic responsibilities:

1. We will treat our colleagues with the utmost respect and we will create a safe learning environment that equitably supports all of our peers.
   • a. We aspire to never treat anyone differently on the basis of any protected class or characteristic.
   • b. We seek to build a culture where conscious, habitual confrontation of our biases is used to improve and strengthen trust in each other.
   • c. To the best of our ability we will ensure the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual safety of our colleagues by using non-threatening, non-sexual, and non-judgmental language and behaviors.
2. We will carry out our academic responsibilities with the utmost honesty and integrity.
   • a. We seek to provide an educational environment that actively supports the cultivation of every student’s growth and development.
   • b. We will always give our best.
   • c. We will not plagiarize.
   • d. We will not cheat.
3. We will respect the wisdom and knowledge of our teachers.
   • a. Those who donate their worldly selves to our enrichment in the human anatomy laboratories will be afforded nothing but the greatest respect; under no circumstances will we take photography of, injure the honor of, nor disrespect the sacrifice made by these teachers to improve the lives of others. They are our greatest teachers.
   • b. It is with the greatest humility that we have the opportunity to join the ranks of physicians long before us, and we will acknowledge the knowledge and efforts of those who have come before us.
4. We will respect their rules, regulations, and property of the University at Buffalo.

Professionalism extends beyond the brick-and-mortar structures of the clinic and university. At the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, the following are expected as the minimum standards of professional behavior in our personal endeavors:

1. We will treat our everyone with the utmost respect.
   • a. We aspire to never treat anyone differently on the basis of any protected class or characteristic.
   • b. We seek to build a culture where conscious, habitual confrontation of our biases is used to strengthen trust in each other and our community in us.
   • c. To the best of our ability we will ensure the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual safety of all individuals by using non-threatening, non-sexual, and non-judgmental language and behaviors.
2. We will never sexually, physically, or verbally harass anyone.
3. We will aspire to use our platform as physicians in an effort to achieve equity.
4. To the best of our abilities, we will represent ourselves honestly to the world in any outlet, including all forms of written, verbal, artistic, and social media.
   • a. We will make judicious use the University at Buffalo’s name, logo or likeness in any social media posts.
5. We will abide by all State and National laws, policies, and regulations.

The Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences considers actions that do not align with the Code to be incompatible with the title of ‘physician.’ As such, we all consider violations of the Code to be intolerable to the profession to which we have dedicated ourselves.

In the unfortunate instance that a student, faculty, or staff member of the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences observes a violation of the Code, they are honor-bound to report that behavior. The Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) is obligated to rigorously review every violation. Each member of the PCC vows to be impartial in reviewing each reported violation of the Code. Each potential violation will be assessed through a template championed by University of Virginia and adapted to the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences: act, knowledge, and significance.

• Act: Was there a potential Code violation?
• Knowledge: Did the student know, or should a reasonable student have known that the Act was a Code violation?
• Significance: Would tolerating the Act damage the honesty and integrity of our profession or community?

The following is the process by which a violation of the Code is investigated by the PCC:

Upon receipt of any report of a student’s violation of the Code, the PCC will convene a subcommittee of three volunteer PCC student members from classes that are different from that of the investigated student. This group is referred to as the ‘Investigative Subcommittee.’ This procedure will be followed unless it is impossible for this condition to be met, at which time a faculty member on the PCC will assign three students who are not in the same class as the reported student to evaluate the report. If three students who are not in the same class as the reported student are not available, every effort will be made to maximize the number of student representatives on the Investigative Subcommittee who are not in the same class as the reported student.

Each member of the Investigative Subcommittee will disclose any possible or actual conflicts of interest to the PCC faculty advisor. If a member of the PCC is implicated in a reported violation, faculty at the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences will directly oversee the case. Multiple reports regarding the same violation will be conducted as one investigation unless circumstances clearly delineate the necessity of another investigation.

No member of the PCC may divulge information regarding investigations outside of the investigation process.

The Investigative Subcommittee will meet and assess the report. The Investigative Subcommittee will then determine if the report should be dismissed, further investigated, referred to the Student Progress Committee, or referred for professional assistance by law enforcement or other appropriate entities. If the Investigative Subcommittee concludes that further investigation is required, that Investigative Subcommittee will conduct an investigation, hold a hearing, and reach a resolution.

Reports may be included on the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) of the investigated. It is the duty of the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences to candidly communicate Code violations to future employers and residency positions because prospective educators and advocates require a truthful, equitable evaluation of our students.

Upon receipt of any report of a student’s violation of the Code, the PCC will convene a subcommittee of three volunteer PCC student members from classes that are different from that of the investigated student. This group is referred to as the ‘Investigative Subcommittee.’ This procedure will be followed unless it is impossible for this condition to be met, at which time a faculty member on the PCC will assign three students who are not in the same class as the reported student to evaluate the report. If three students who are not in the same class as the reported student are not available, every effort will be made to maximize the number of student representatives on the Investigative Subcommittee who are not in the same class as the reported student.

Each member of the Investigative Subcommittee will disclose any possible or actual conflicts of interest to the PCC faculty adviser. If a member of the PCC is implicated in a reported violation, faculty at the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences will directly oversee the case. Multiple reports regarding the same violation will be conducted as one investigation unless circumstances clearly delineate the necessity of another investigation.

No member of the PCC may divulge information regarding investigations outside of the investigation process.

The Investigative Subcommittee will meet and assess the report. The Investigative Subcommittee will then determine if the report should be dismissed, further investigated, referred to the Student Progress Committee, or referred for professional assistance by law enforcement or other appropriate entities. If the Investigative Subcommittee concludes that further investigation is required, that Investigative Subcommittee will conduct an investigation, hold a hearing, and reach a resolution.

Reports may be included on the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) of the investigated. It is the duty of the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences to candidly communicate Code violations to future employers and residency positions because prospective educators and advocates require a truthful, equitable evaluation of our students.

Any members of the PCC with a conflict of interest will not participate in any phase of the investigation or hearing. Representatives not directly involved in the investigation or hearing will not have access to any information gathered in the investigation.

An impartial report will be written by the Investigative Subcommittee delineating the facts of the alleged incident. The report will contain:

1. An executive summary that includes the identities of the Investigative Subcommittee.
2. An unedited copy of the reported violation, including the name of the individual who reported the violation.
3. Notes of conversations with the investigated and the reporter(s). The reporter(s) will be contacted first, followed by the investigated, followed by any witnesses or other persons with pertinent information, or in the order most logically appropriate. It is at this point in the investigation process that the investigated will be made aware that a report was made about them alleging a violation of the Code.
   • iiia. Reporters will not be anonymous to the investigated.
   • iiib. The Investigative Subcommittee may interview other people relevant to the case, but will make a reasonable effort to keep the number of investigated parties to a minimum.
   • iiic. Conversations with involved parties may be in-person, but are not required to be in-person.
   • iiid. If the Investigative Subcommittee finds the reports to be without merit, the charges will be dropped, no annotation will be made on the investigated individuals’ MSPE, and no hearing will be arranged

Note that purposeful misuse of the PCC is, in and of itself, a violation of the Code. Retaliatory reports against reporters is inherently a misuse of the PCC.

A component of professionalism is ensuring the privacy of all parties involved an investigation and it is expected for students to behave accordingly.

The report may conclude that a hearing be called to address any party involved in the Investigative Subcommittee’s investigation.

Following an investigation for which the Investigative Subcommittee determines that a hearing is necessary, a hearing will be scheduled with a quorum of the PCC. The following guidelines are to facilitate an equitable hearing:

• Quorum for a hearing must include at least the Investigative Subcommittee, two of the three PCC faculty advisers, at least one PCC member from the non-involved classes, and the Student Affairs Dean adviser.
• The reporter(s) and the investigated are expected to be present, but failure to attend the hearing will not stop the hearing from occurring.
• The hearing is to be led by a member of the Investigative Subcommittee.
• These hearings will not be recorded; however, another member of the Investigative Subcommittee will take notes during the hearing.
• No attorneys may be present during the hearing.

The hearing is to include the following components:

• A review of the Investigative Subcommittee’s investigation by members of the quorum.
• A verbal reading of the Investigative Subcommittee’s investigation in the presence of the quorum and the investigated and/or reporter as appropriate.
•  formal statement and presentation of pertinent evidence from the reporter(s).
• A time for questions from the members of the PCC to the reporter(s).
•  formal statement and presentation of pertinent evidence from the investigated.
• A time for questions from the members of the PCC to the investigated.
•  time for final discussion between the PCC, investigated, and/or reporter(s) as appropriate.
•  A time for final deliberation between members of the PCC with respect to possible resolutions.
• Dismissal of the investigated and/or reporter(s) for composition of the hearing document.
  • The hearing document should include the Investigative Subcommittee’s original report, the names of all in attendance, notes regarding each of the above components of the hearing, and a recommendation to the Student Progress Committee. The hearing report should include that an annotation in the MSPE may be made and include guidance for professional development.
    • Guidance will be formulated with professional development at the forefront. Meaningful professional development action on the part of the investigated that can include, but is not limited to: counseling, a leave of absence, professional development seminars, volunteer work with communities or individuals, as well as public or private apology.
    • Guidelines on specific meaningful actions for particular violations will be offered to tailor development to the individual.
• The hearing document will be shared with all of those whose names are included on the document, as well as the Student Progress Committee.

After the hearing is concluded and the hearing document is disseminated to the aforementioned parties, the Student Progress Committee will make the final ruling of which of the recommendation(s) are to be adopted as a formal resolution procedure. The resolution propositions may be approved or modified by the Student Progress Committee. Recommendations will be based on, but are not limited to, the severity of the violation, situation, strength of evidence, attitudes toward the process, and past actions by the PCC or Student Progress Committee. All individuals who are included in the hearing document will be informed of the final decision of the Student Progress Committee by a member of the PCC.

The PCC will consist of three voting representatives of each of the four classes who will be elected by their peers. Representatives will be elected during their first year and will serve for the duration of their medical education. In the event that a representative is unable or unwilling to continue to serve, elections will be held to fill their place with a new representative from their original class year. The Chairperson will be a representative from the second-year class who has served at least one semester on the PCC, elected by the student representatives.

The PCC will also contain one voting faculty representative and one alternate for each Phase I and Phase II. A non-voting administrative representative will also function as a coordinator of the PCC. All faculty representatives will be appointed by the Senior Associate Dean for Student and Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Chair of the PCC.

Reports are to be submitted here.

A student found responsible of a conduct violation may make a request to appeal to the Senior Associate Dean for Medical Curriculum or the Senior Associate Dean for Student and Academic Affairs.

All sections of the Code will be subject to the possibility of amendment through a voting process to be held no more often than once per academic year. As with the approval process, changes to the Code will be accepted following the consensus of a two-thirds majority of the votes received from members of all four classes.

This version of the Code was last revised by Isha Garg, Blake Kruger, Lauren Lewis, Lauren Smith, Issac Swartzman, Joshua Taubman, Maritza Taylor, Jessica Baker, JD, David Milling, MD, Andrea Manyon, MD, and Blake Kruger. This version of the Code was ratified by the 2/3rds majority of all classes on April 8, 2022.