Zaphir v Health Ombudsman [2017] QCAT 193

Decision date: 16 June 2017
“PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – HEALTH PRACTITIONERS REGULATION NATIONAL LAW GENERALLY – where the practitioner was an unregistered health practitioner – where the Health Ombudsman took immediate action by issuing an interim prohibition order in relation to the practitioner under s 68 of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) – where the interim prohibition order prohibited the practitioner from any employment (paid or otherwise) in a clinical or non-clinical capacity which relates to the provision of any health service – whether the Tribunal believes the action is necessary to protect public health or safety.”
Find decision here.

Medical Board of Australia v Adams (Review and Regulation) [2017] VCAT 796

Decision date: 14 June 2017
“Misconduct of medical practitioner – forging signature to patient consent forms – weight of agreed statement of facts and determinations – agreed determination found inadequate – practitioner suspended from practice.”
Find decision here.

Seymour v Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia [2017] VCAT 901

Decision date: 21 June 2017
“Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Vic) 2009 ss 3, 178, 202 (1); positive urine and hair sample drug test results; formation of a reasonable belief that the manner in which a nurse practises is or may be unsatisfactory; whether necessary to impose conditions on practise. Group 1 urine and hair testing substituted for Group 2 testing.”
Find decision here.

Florida Cuts Telemedicine Out of New Medical Marijuana Law

mHealthIntelligence, 15 June 2017
Source: mHealthIntelligence
“Florida lawmakers have passed legislation that prevents doctors from using telemedicine to issue a prescription for medical marijuana. The rule requires that Sunshine State doctors who want to issue a medical marijuana prescription must first “(conduct) a physical examination while physically present in the same room as the patient and a full assessment of the medical history of the patient.” With some 29 states and Washington D.C. allowing medical marijuana, state officials are looking to control how the drug is prescribed and distributed, including through telehealth.”
Find article here.

The Health Ombudsman v Riek [2017] QCAT 173

Decision date: 5 June 2017
“Where respondent practitioner stole schedule 8 medication from his employer – where the respondent was convicted of 1 count of stealing as a servant in the Magistrates Court in relation to that conduct – where respondent earlier diagnosed with ADD, major depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder – where evidence and submissions dealt with whether respondent impaired in practising due to suffering from a substance abuse disorder – where impairment due to substance abuse disorder not an element of any charges brought by Health Ombudsman – whether the practitioner engaged in professional misconduct or unprofessional conduct – whether Tribunal should have regard to impairment due to substance abuse disorder – whether reprimand, suspension or disqualification an appropriate sanction – whether an order as to costs should be made.”
Find decision here.

The Health Ombudsman v Jamieson [2017] QCAT 172

Decision date: 5 June 2017
“Where respondent practitioner stole three boxes of antibiotics from her place of employment – where the practitioner used the antibiotics to treat her son’s recurrent medical condition – where the respondent was convicted of 1 count of stealing as a servant in the Magistrates Court in relation to that conduct – where no conviction recorded in respect of that charge – where respondent failed to notify the National Board of that charge – where respondent made a false declaration when renewing her registration in respect of that charge – where respondent believed she did not need to disclose the charge as no conviction was recorded – whether the practitioner engaged in professional misconduct or unprofessional conduct – whether reprimand is an appropriate sanction – whether an order as to costs should be made.”
Find decision here.

Medical Board of Australia v Griffiths (Review and Regulation)

Decision date: 9 June 2017
“Review and Regulation List – medical practitioner – inappropriate prescription and medical treatment – prescription of opioids and benzodiazepines – inappropriate treatment of persons with whom shared a close personal relationship – breach of S8 permit obligations – agreed facts and findings and joint proposed determinations – Medical Practice Act 1994 (Vic) s 3(1), Health Professions Registration Act 2005 (Vic) s 3(1), Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Victoria) Act 2009 (Vic) s 5(a).”
Find order here.