Under the new contract, current state and territory based providers would come under a national service, centrally controlled by Drs4Drs, a not for profit established as an independent subsidiary of the AMA, which receives its funding directly from AHPRA and must report its outcomes directly to them.
Drs4Drs is branded as free, independent and confidential, and its website clearly states that it is governed by an independent board of directors.
However, two of its five board members – both the chair and deputy chair – also hold key positions on the Professional Services Review (PSR), the Medicare compliance watchdog.
Drs4Drs Chair Dr Iain Dunlop is also Chair of the PSR Determining Authority – the body responsible for signing off on negotiated agreements between the PSR Director and health practitioners, as well as handing down penalties.
Meanwhile, Dr4Drs Deputy Chair Associate Professor Antonio Di Dio is also the Director of the PSR.
Against this backdrop, state-based support services were issued new contracts in mid-December last year.
To date, a number of state-based services have not signed, despite funding having run out on 31 December 2025.
Last week Doctors’ Health NSW published a statement outlining some of their concerns.
“We cannot, with professional and ethical integrity, enter a new contract that would embed the NSW service within a centralised national structure directly linked to the regulator,” they said, noting that despite previously receiving funding through registration fees, they had operated separately to AHPRA.
“The shift to a centralised model represents a fundamental change to this structure and to the independence on which confidence in the local NSW service has been built.”
In a national Healthed poll with over 1800 doctor respondents so far, doctors were clear they preferred the regulator at arms’ length – with 67% saying health services should be delivered through locally governed, state or territory-based service with independence from employers, regulators and training bodies. Just 33% said services should be delivered through a single national service offering standardisation, potential efficiencies from centralisation, and direct funding from the regulator.
In response to Doctors’ Health NSW public statement, the Medical Board of Australia was adamant that Drs4Drs remains independent, and that their contract explicitly precludes them from sharing any confidential or identifying information with AHPRA or the Board.
“The contract requires that only high-level, non-identifying activity data is provided to us,” a spokesperson for the Medical Board told Healthed.
They Board had “taken great care with legal and financial arrangements to make sure that all doctors can confidently access confidential health care and support when they need it,” The spokesperson added. (See their full response below.)
Despite these assurances, some are concerned about potential risks associated with data collection and reporting.
Doctors’ Health NSW currently operates under strict protocols to protect the anonymity of doctors who use their services.
For example, they don’t collect data on registration type or speciality “because, in small cohorts, this information may be sufficient to identify individuals even when the data is aggregated, particularly when combined with gender, location, presenting problem and workforce participation.”
Requirements to provide aggregate data on longer term outcomes – such as how many doctors continued working or returned to work and the proportion who followed recommendations— would necessitate keeping callers contact details and other relevant information in order to follow up, they added.
“This is not current practice for Doctors’ Health NSW, where callers are anonymous and no contact details are retained.”
These are among the reasons the support service is seeking alternative funding.
“Protecting the confidentiality and safety of our callers, and maintaining the trust of the profession, must come first. We could not agree to terms that would compromise the independence and safety that underpin this service.”
The overwhelming majority of doctors in Healthed’s survey felt the current system should not be replaced without clear evidence that a new model is better.
Doctors in the survey ranked ‘trust and confidentiality’ as the most important feature in a doctors’ health service (chosen by 81% of respondents). ‘Independence from employers, regulators and training bodies’ ranked second, picked by 57%, while ’National consistency and standardised processes’ ranked last in the list of six features, chosen by 39%.
The Medical Board’s full response
“The Medical Board of Australia is proud to fund an independent health service for doctors who need it. It has taken great care with legal and financial arrangements to make sure that all doctors can confidently access confidential health care and support when they need it.”
“The Board (through Ahpra) has been funding health services for doctors for more than 10 years, through a subsidiary company of the AMA – Drs4Drs. All registered medical practitioners contribute to this through their annual registration renewal fees. Drs4Drs sub-contracts with state based health services to provide care to doctors and medical students in need.”
“The Board deliberately contracts an independent third party (Drs4Drs) to protect individual doctors’ confidentiality and eliminate any risk of privacy breaches. This arrangement has not changed.”
“Ahpra’s contract with Drs4Drs specifically precludes Drs4Drs from sharing confidential, identifying information about individual doctors with the Board/ Ahpra. The contract requires that only high-level, non-identifying activity data is provided to us. There has been no change to historic data sharing requirements in this contract. Independently provided doctors’ health services are funded by the medical profession and are accountable to the profession through this high level activity reporting.”
“Ahpra (for the Medical Board) has renewed its $2.3 million contract with the AMA’s Drs4Drs, to continue delivering confidential health services to doctors and medical students across Australia.”
“In contrast to past years, from 2026 we are moving to a more national, coordinated service so that all doctors in need – who contribute the same funds through their registration fees wherever they live in Australia – can receive a similar level of service.”
“State based health services can continue to operate within this more consistent national framework, taking advantage of some shared resources and economies of scale.”
“The Board wants fair and equitable services for all doctors who need it no matter where they live, as they all contribute the same funds through their registration fees. State-based services can continue to operate within this framework, providing direct care to doctors who need it.”
“We are striving to ensure this important service is even more accessible to those who need it and encourage local doctors’ health services to continue to work with Drs4Drs, to benefit all doctors.”
Listen to expert interviews.
Click to open in a new tab
Browse the latest articles from Healthed.
Once you confirm you’ve read this article you can complete a Patient Case Review to earn 0.5 hours CPD in the Reviewing Performance (RP) category.
Select ‘Confirm & learn‘ when you have read this article in its entirety and you will be taken to begin your Patient Case Review.
