Writing Reflections for Fitness to Practise
You have been asked for a reflection, and nobody has told you what one is. Three hours, online, with a lawyer who reads these for a living — what a panel is actually looking for, what quietly damages a reflection, and how to write one that sounds like you. £60.
Registrants who have been asked to reflect
You are under investigation
Your regulator, or your representative, has asked you for a reflective piece. You have read the word “insight” a dozen times and nobody has explained what it means as a technical requirement rather than a feeling.
You are contesting the allegation
You maintain that you did not do it, and you have been told to reflect anyway. Denial and insight are not opposites — but what you write has to be capable of being read alongside your denial. We spend a block of the session on exactly this.
You have a finding to remediate
Conditions, undertakings or a suspension, and you need evidenced remediation rather than another certificate. You leave with a way of building a dated body of reflective work over months.
You have written one and it feels wrong
You have a draft that reads like a form you filled in, or like your solicitor wrote it, and you cannot see why. Most weak reflections are weak for one fixable reason, and the session spends its longest block on that reason.
Panels say so themselves
These are findings from published fitness to practise determinations. Names have been removed; the wording is the panel's own. They are here because they make the point far better than we could: insight is not a formality at the end of the process, and a panel will say plainly when it cannot find it.
“…the panel is of the view that there is a high risk of repetition because your misconduct showed multiple fundamental and basic failings to which you have limited insight and developing reflections.”
Read the order of that sentence. The risk of repetition is the finding, and the reason given for it is the state of the reflective work. The registrant had completed a significant number of training courses; the panel said so in the preceding line. Courses were not the gap.
“The Committee noted that you have demonstrated genuine remorse, insight, including the impact on your colleagues and the wider profession, and remediation by way of in-depth and thoughtful self-reflections and CPD learning.”
The same thing from the other side, and worth reading slowly. Remorse and insight are listed as separate things. The impact named is on colleagues and the wider profession — not on the registrant. And the reflections are plural: several short pieces, not one long document. That is what the session teaches you to produce.
“…the Registrant had demonstrated little insight but it did not conclude that she was incapable of gaining insight.”
This is the reason the session exists. Little insight today is a finding about today. Panels distinguish between someone who has not shown insight and someone who cannot develop it — and that second half of the sentence is the part you can still do something about.
Three hours, one room, and a person answering you
Not a recording and not a handout. Alexia Cortes, an assistant case lawyer at Sequentus Legal Services, takes a small group through how a reflection is actually read — the five questions the reader has, the material that quietly damages a reflection by being in the wrong document, the six things a panel spots immediately, and how to sound like yourself rather than like a chatbot or a solicitor. There is a proper open question-and-answer session at the end, which is the part most people say they needed.
- Three hours, online, Saturday morning
- A small group — eight to fourteen people
- Real determinations, so you see what panels actually write
- Fifteen minutes of open Q&A that never gets cut
- A take-home pack of five worksheets, yours to keep
- A dated reflective log you start in the session
- Your own copy of the materials in our learning platform
- No assessment, no marking, nothing to submit
Three things to know first
We do not discuss your own case
Everything you say to your lawyer is privileged. Nothing you say to the other people in the session is. So we work on cases we have made up, and you apply it to your own situation in writing, privately. Nobody reads what you write and we do not ask to see it. If that is not what you are looking for, this is not the right session.
It is teaching, not advice
Alexia is teaching, not advising, and most people in the room will not be her client. If something raises a question about your own case — and it should — that question goes to whoever is running your case. Tell her at the end and she will make sure it reaches them.
Other registrants will be there
It is a small group of people in the same position as you, which is most of what makes it worth doing. You will not be asked to say anything about your own circumstances, and nobody is put in a breakout room with anybody. But you should know before you book.
£60 — one session, every five weeks
One standalone session. You attend once; it runs again every five weeks with a new group. Dates below are provisional while we confirm the diary — if you would like a place, tell us which one and we will hold it.
Booking opens shortly — register your interest
Booking opens shortly — register your interest
Booking opens shortly — register your interest
Further dates: 20 February 2027 · 27 March 2027 · 1 May 2027.
Common questions
No, and you were never going to — a reflection takes weeks and it has to be yours. What you will have is a plan for one, a dated log you started in the session, and a clear idea of what not to put in it.
Yes, and a block of the session is about exactly that. Denial and insight are not opposites, and a panel that hears nothing at all from you draws its own conclusions. There are things you can properly reflect on without conceding anything — and one of the determinations we look at is a reflective piece that failed because it could not be read alongside the registrant's denial.
No. We work on cases we have made up, and you never have to say anything about your own circumstances. That is a firm rule rather than a preference, and the session is built around it.
Not in the session. That is casework, it belongs on your file, and it is a decision for whoever is running your case. What you get here is the ability to tell for yourself, and a checklist you can run your own draft against.
No. This is education, delivered by Sequentus Education. No retainer arises from attending, and if you are represented you should keep relying on your own representative. If something in the session raises a question about your case, we will make sure it reaches the right person.
We would strongly advise against it, and the session explains why in practical terms rather than moral ones. The document's whole job is to be evidence about you — and you may be asked whether you wrote it yourself.
Tell us. If there is enough demand for a different day we will run one; the session repeats every five weeks either way.
Our latest QWE skills training cohort
The latest students to embark on our QWE skills training have started their eight-week intensive programme, leading to…
Mar 2026Sheffield students ready to undertake pro bono
Over the course of the next six week, students from the University of Sheffield will be joining our…
Mar 2026New dates for QWE skills training announced
The next intake of our QWE skills training courses will be in March, May and September 2026.
Nov 2025University of Birmingham students start work on professional discipline cases
The latest group of UoB join a six-week programme to learn about fitness to practise and work pro…
Oct 2025City Bar / LLM students join for 2025/26
A warm welcome to the latest group of students from City Law School, who will be developing their…
Sep 2025