An enforceable code, and a real avenue of recourse
Thirty-three articles across six titles, drafted as a self-standing document: no reference to a brand, no professional title, applicable by any organisation that adopts it. Its scope is defined by the nature of the relationship, not by a professional title.
The founding principles
Five principles open the Code and govern everything that follows. They are stated in few words because they are not negotiable: every article in the later titles is simply one of them, applied to a specific situation within the relationship.
- Dignity and autonomy of the person, respect for the person being accompanied and for their capacity to decide for themselves.
- Beneficence and non-maleficence, act in the person's interest, and above all do no harm.
- Non-judgement and impartiality.
- Honesty and professional integrity, about what accompaniment can, and cannot, offer.
- Justice, fairness and non-discrimination.
The six titles of the Code
| 0 | Scope and definitions |
| I | Founding principles |
| II | The accompaniment relationship |
| III | Confidentiality, the boundary of care, protection of persons |
| IV | Competence and professional development |
| V | Protection of personal data |
| VI | Responsibility, oversight and breaches |
Built after comparing four reference codes: SNPPsy and FF2P for psychotherapy, EMCC and ICF for coaching and mentoring.
How to read the Code
A text of thirty-three articles is hard to take in at a single sitting. We therefore set it out below in three parts, following the order in which the questions arise over the course of an accompaniment relationship, from the first meeting through to the handling of a complaint.
Relationship and confidentiality covers what arises at the very start: consent, the contract, insurance, then confidentiality and the protection of vulnerable persons. It is the foundation of the bond between the practitioner and the person who comes to them.
The boundary of care takes up the most debated point in the Code. It separates what the practitioner may do from what belongs to the medical field, and sets the line no member crosses.
Competence and recourse closes the loop: the duty to keep training and to be supervised, and the complaints procedure that makes the Code enforceable rather than merely declaratory.
The bond, set before anything else
Before any accompaniment produces the slightest effect, a relationship has formed, and it is there that most of the protection owed to the person is decided. So the Code first sets the terms of the bond: what must be said and signed at the outset, what safeguards the person in the event of a dispute, and what remains covered by confidentiality.
Someone who walks through a practitioner's door is, almost always, in the weaker position: they come because they are looking for something, they know less than the professional about what is going to happen, and they extend from the outset a trust that would be easy to betray. The articles gathered here correct that imbalance by requiring the professional to make the relationship legible before it begins.
The accompaniment relationship
Title II of the Code describes what is put in place from the first contact. Nothing here is left to the practitioner's tact: every obligation is written to be verifiable.
Informed consent and a clear contract. Purpose, frame, limits and terms set out from the start. The practitioner positions themselves explicitly as a non-clinician from the moment consent is obtained.
Professional insurance. Professional liability cover is compulsory before any practice, maintained without interruption, with a certificate available on request.
Mediation of commercial disputes. A right to a professional mediator for any dispute over delivery or fees, explicitly distinct from the disciplinary procedure for a breach of the Code.
Confidentiality and the protection of persons
What the person confides must stay covered, but confidentiality is never absolute, and the Code requires its limits to be stated in advance rather than discovered at the wrong moment.
Confidentiality comes with obligations that protect the person beyond secrecy alone. The text states them together because they answer a single requirement: to keep the relationship safe, including for those least able to defend themselves.
Strict confidentiality, with its limits made explicit to the person from the outset: legal obligation, danger to self or others, judicial requisition. Enhanced protection of vulnerable persons and minors. An absolute prohibition on intimate or sexual relations with a person being accompanied. Declaration and management of conflicts of interest and dual relationships. Governance of digital tools and artificial intelligence.
Where accompaniment stops and care begins
This is the point of the Code on which the federations diverge most, and the one the public understands least well. A practitioner works alongside suffering without being a carer. What remains is to state precisely what they are permitted to do, what is forbidden to them, and at what sign they must hand over.
The difficulty does not come from a confusion of intentions: no one, in the field, seriously claims to treat an illness. It comes from the fact that the gestures resemble one another. Listening to someone's distress, helping them make sense of what unsettles them, standing by them through a dark period, all of this can belong to accompaniment as much as to care, depending on the depth of the work and the nature of what is at stake. So the Code draws the line not on appearances, but on a precise distinction between two acts that are often conflated.
The boundary of care, refined
It all begins with a distinction between two acts that the same word covers, and which nonetheless call for neither the same competence nor the same responsibility.
Situational assessment, understanding the person, their request, their resources and their context. It is a methodological act, permitted, and central to accompaniment.
Clinical diagnosis, identifying a disorder in the medical, psychiatric or psychological sense. Excluded from the scope, without exception, and reserved for an authorised health professional.
Once that distinction is set, the question remains of where to place the threshold of caution. The Code refuses to make it depend on the label of the profession.
Vigilance is graded by the nature of the practice used, not by the profession: a coaching practice that touches deep-held beliefs carries the same level of risk as a hypnosis session. The boundary does not follow job titles.
Referring on is an act of competence
Recognising that a situation exceeds the scope is not an admission of weakness: it is part of the work, and the Code makes it an obligation.
As soon as a sign exceeds the scope, significant psychological distress, suicide risk, an established or suspected condition, the practitioner refers the person to a health professional without delay. A practitioner who never refers is not a very competent one: they are a practitioner who does not see what they ought to see.
What no member may do
- Present their practice as treating, healing or curing an identified illness, disorder or symptom.
- Encourage the discontinuation of a medical treatment, substitute themselves for ongoing care, or make their accompaniment conditional on breaking off that care.
- Use a protected title without meeting its legal conditions.
- Make the effectiveness of their practice conditional on the person's belief.
The first two constitute serious breaches: removal is possible without any prior chance to come back into compliance.
What makes the Code enforceable
A code of ethics that comes with no duty to keep training and no complaints procedure remains a statement of intent. The two titles gathered here give the text its real force: the requirement to maintain one's competence, and an avenue of recourse open to anyone who believes they have been wronged.
The quality of an accompaniment is not guaranteed once and for all on the day of a qualification. It is maintained, or it declines, over the course of a career, under the effect of fatigue, routine and isolation. The Code answers that risk with continuing obligations, then sets out what must happen when a breach occurs all the same.
Competence and development
Title IV requires every member to keep up to date and not to work alone. None of these obligations depends on the practitioner's initial training.
Limits of practice. The practitioner works only within the limits of their training, their experience and their actual competence. When a situation exceeds them, they tell the person and refer them on.
Continuing professional development. Maintained throughout the career, documented, and verifiable.
Supervision. Used regularly, whatever the practice, with no practitioner exempt. Frequency and arrangements are stepped up according to the level of vigilance required.
Professional self-care. Recognising one's own limits, fatigue, life events, state of health, where they may affect the quality of one's work, and seeking the support needed.
Breaches and recourse
When someone believes they have been wronged, they must find a door, and that door must lead to a decision. Title VI organises this path into five stages, from the simplest to the most serious.
An accessible and legible complaints procedure, structured in stages.
- Informal resolutionA direct report and an attempt to resolve matters between the parties, where the situation allows.
- Formal reportThe matter is brought in writing to the attention of the responsible body.
- Adversarial inquiryThe person complained about is informed, the material is shared with them, a time to respond is given, and a hearing is held if they request it.
- Proportionate measureFrom a recommendation and corrective training through to suspension, and up to exclusion in the event of a serious or repeated breach.
- Reasoned and notified decisionTo the parties concerned, in writing.
Restorative aim first. The procedure favours bringing conduct back into compliance over sanction, except for serious breaches: an intimate relationship with a person being accompanied, endangering a vulnerable person, an unjustified breach of confidentiality, practising without valid insurance, pressure exerted on a person's medical care.