Google Business Profile for chiropractic clinics.

The same review, two opposite duties

Australia and New Zealand impose different obligations on the identical Google review of a chiropractor. New Zealand expects the clinic to attempt to have a non-compliant review removed. Australia does not require removal, but warns that replying to it may convert the review into advertising the practitioner is responsible for.

A clinic operating in both markets, or an agency running one playbook across both, will get one of them wrong. The safe default is not to ignore reviews, it is to decide in advance which reviews get a reply and what those replies may say.

You are liable for copy you did not write

Chiropractic regulators in three countries have independently held that a practitioner is personally responsible for advertising copy they did not write, including copy produced by their own marketing agency.

That turns the choice of who touches your website and profile from a procurement decision into a clinical risk decision. It is also the reason we check what you are permitted to claim before writing anything, rather than writing first and reviewing later.

The deterrent figures have moved. The Hance Limboro prosecution in Australia ended in 13 charges, a guilty plea, a conviction and a fine of AUD 29,500 plus AHPRA's legal costs, and the fine was for using testimonials rather than only for the clinical claims. Since 2022 the maximum per advertising offence for an individual has risen from AUD 5,000 to AUD 60,000, so the same set of charges today would carry a far larger exposure.

What you may claim to treat is a closed list in the UK

In the United Kingdom there is a published list of exactly 19 conditions a chiropractor may claim to treat in advertising. Anything outside it requires the advertiser to hold robust clinical evidence before the claim is made, not after it is challenged.

AHPRA's chiropractor-specific advertising guidance names conditions that cannot be corrected and must be removed from advertising, and separately warns that publishing a bare list of conditions can itself imply a claim.

In practice this means a compliant chiropractic profile usually says less than the clinic would like, and ranks better for it, because what remains is specific and defensible rather than broad and hedged.

What we do on a chiropractic profile

• A claims review against the list that applies in your market, before any copy is written
• Services list built only from what you are permitted to claim, in the words patients search
• A review reply policy that accounts for the difference between the Australian and New Zealand positions
• Categories chosen for the case mix you want rather than the broadest option
• Description and posts written to avoid the bare-list implication problem
• Monitoring for third-party edits and user-suggested changes to the profile
• Monthly reporting on calls and bookings, with the claims position re-checked as guidance changes

Questions

Sources

• ASA — chiropractic advertising guidance (UK)
• Chiropractic Board of Australia — advertising
• Chiropractic Board of New Zealand — advertising policy

Guides for chiropractors