Upcoming panel discussion, ‘Beyond Empathy: Responsibility in a post-truth world’

The Sydney Jewish Museum together with Sydney Health Ethics at the University of Sydney invite you to a panel discussion, ‘Beyond Empathy: Responsibility in a post-truth world’.

“Can empathy be taught? Is empathy a solution to human rights abuses? In a world where ambiguity and misinformation is used to shape public debate, this panel will examine how and why empathy might be important. Please come and join the discussion at this thought-provoking event.”

Panel:
Hagar Cohen: award-winning ABC journalist with the ‘Background Briefing’ program.
Father Bob Maguire: an Australian Roman Catholic Priest, community worker and media personality. Bob is actively engaged in Fr Bob Maguire Foundation that serves more than 45,000 hot meals and 8,000 hampers a year.
Dr Gary Galambos: a psychiatrist at St Vincent’s Hospital, with a special interest in anxiety, mood and psychotic disorders, bipolar, depression and dysthymic disorder. Gary is also a Senior Lecturer at UNSW.
Moderator: Michael Robertson, clinical associate professor, Sydney Health Ethics, The University of Sydney.

When: Sunday, 29 October 2017 at 10:30am
Where: Sydney Jewish Museum, 148 Darlinghurst Road, Darlinghurst NSW

Click here for more information.

Ahmad v Medical Board of Australia (Review and Regulation) [2017] VCAT 1646

Decision date: 11 October 2017
“Review and Regulation List – Immediate Action against a medical practitioner– Summary suspension of applicant’s Alaskan medical licence – whether practitioner’s registration has been suspended under the law of another jurisdiction –whether reasonable belief that because of his performance or conduct the practitioner poses a serious risk to persons and it is necessary to take immediate action to protect public health or safety – conduct relating to practitioner’s prescribing of controlled substances including opioids while in practice in Alaska –whether practitioner can be permitted to work only as an anaesthesiologist or whether suspension is the minimum regulatory action required – decision of the respondent affirmed – Health Practitioner National Law ss 3(3)(c), 155, 156(1)(a), 156(1)(d).”
Find decision here.

Victorian woman fined $20,000 for posing as a psychologist and a general practitioner

Medical Board of Australia, 10 October 2017
“A court has fined a Victorian woman $20,000 without conviction and ordered her to pay $10,000 in costs for holding out as a psychologist and as a general practitioner. It followed her treatment of patients as a psychologist while not registered to do so under the National Law.”
Find report here.

Pere v Central Queensland Hospital and Health Service [2017] QCA 225

Decision date: 6 October 2017
“PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS – LIABILITY IN TORT – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – where the applicant was employed by the respondent – where the applicant was acting unusually while at work – where a co-worker escorted the applicant to the Emergency Department – where medical staff believed the applicant to be either under the influence of alcohol or illicit drugs, or suffering from a medical condition that would require urgent attention – where a doctor discussed the taking of blood and urine samples with the applicant – where the hospital staff reported the applicant was calm and co-operative and that consent was obtained prior to the taking of the samples – where the applicant claims no consent was given…’.
Find decision here.

Patients’ Experiences With Communication-and-Resolution Programs After Medical Injury

JAMA Intern Med. Published online October 09, 2017
Authors: Jennifer Moore, Marie Bismark, Michelle M. Mello
“Dissatisfaction with medical malpractice litigation has stimulated interest by health care organizations in developing alternatives to meet patients’ needs after medical injury. In communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs), hospitals and liability insurers communicate with patients about adverse events, use investigation findings to improve patient safety, and offer compensation when substandard care caused harm. Despite increasing interest in this approach, little is known about patients’ and family members’ experiences with CRPs.”
Find article here.

IN THE MATTER OF ED (Mental Health) [2017] ACAT 84

Decision date: 18 October 2017
“MENTAL HEALTH – authorisation of short-term involuntary detention for immediate treatment, care or support – statutory preconditions for initial detention by a doctor for 3 days – Tribunal order extending the period of involuntary detention for a period not longer than an additional 11 days – Tribunal review of involuntary detention under section 85 of the Mental Health Act – relevant conditions and when they must apply for exercise of discretionary power.”
Find decision here.

Newly controversial opioid enforcement law under fire

The Hill, 17 October 2017
Author: Rachel Roubein
“Several lawmakers are pushing to repeal or revisit a law critics say enables the flow of deadly and addictive opioids, hours after President Trump’s drug czar nominee withdrew his name amid the controversy.”
Find article here.

Has the right to breach patient confidentiality created a common law duty to warn genetic relatives?

QUT Law Review Volume 17, Issue 1, pp.147–159
Author: Wendy Nixon
“This paper discusses the conflict between a medical practitioner’s duty of care and duty to maintain patient confidentiality, and their statutory right to inform a relative about a possible genetic condition. The statutory right arguably creates a Rogers v Whitaker type duty to provide the same information a patient might require in order to make informed choices about testing and treatment. In the event that reasonable clinical judgment is not applied to disclosure, the genetic relative ought to be offered the opportunity to seek redress through the common law if they suffer harm as a result.”
Find article here.

Let us talk about eggs! Professional resistance to elective egg vitrification and gendered medical paternalism

Med Health Care and Philos (2017), p1-13
Authors: Judit Sándor, Lilla Vicsek, Zsófia Bauer
“In this paper, by applying a feminist bioethical perspective, we identify a new form of medical paternalism that still shapes contemporary legal policies on human egg cryopreservation performed without medical reasons. The fear of negligent, careless women who opt to delay their pregnancy for mere convenience is a widely known gender biased stereotype. Nevertheless, the opinions and judgments of medical professionals on this issue have not yet been sufficiently explored by in-depth research. In this essay, therefore, first we look at the broader bioethical, legal, and social aspects of human egg cryopreservation. In the second part of the paper we discuss a unique qualitative study conducted with professionals working at Hungarian IVF clinics.”
Find article here.