Woman in minimally conscious state should be allowed to die, says judge after hearing evidence from family

BMJ 2017; 359: j5138
Author: Clare Dyer
“A 72 year old woman in a minimally conscious state who was kept alive by artificial feeding would have found her situation “not only intolerable but humiliating” and it would be in her best interests to withdraw feeding, a High Court judge has said.”
Find article here.

Can options make us worse off? Choice, pressure, and paid kidney donation

JME Blog, 7 November 2017
Author: Julian J. Koplin
“Paying people to donate a ‘spare’ kidney might help alleviate the current shortage of transplantable organs. However, doing so would conflict with a principle widely accepted within the medical community since the earliest days of organ transplantation: that bodily organs should not be bought and sold. My paper focuses on one important facet of the organ market debate: the question of whether it can be bad to have the option of selling one’s kidney.”
Find article here.

GMC to push for erasure of paediatrician convicted of manslaughter

BMJ 2017; 359: j5223
Author: Clare Dyer
“The General Medical Council is to press ahead with an appeal in the High Court against what it considers a too lenient regulatory sanction on a paediatrician convicted of gross negligence manslaughter, despite a letter signed by more than 100 doctors urging the GMC to reconsider.”
Find article here.

Medical Council of New South Wales v Lee [2017] NSWCA 282

Decision date: 6 November 2017
“PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – allegations of criminal conduct against medical practitioner – medical practitioner suspended pursuant to s 159 of Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) – stay granted by Tribunal pursuant to s 43(3) of Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) – whether Tribunal had power to grant stay – Tribunal not empowered by s 43(3) – National Law intended to be exhaustive – Tribunal not empowered by s 161B of National Law unless medical practitioner appeals against the suspension decision with respect to a point of law. PROCEDURE – whether appellant’s failure to put argument to Tribunal precludes grant of leave – appellant concedes it should pay costs of appeal – interests of justice that appellant be permitted to rely on argument.”
Find decision here.

Mexico baby death trial reveals growing persecution of women who miscarry

The Guardian, 8 November 2017
Author: David Agren
“McPherson is currently serving a 16-year sentence after she was convicted of homicide for the death of her baby in what she says was a miscarriage. Her case gained national notoriety when court videos surfaced in which the prosecutor described McPherson’s alleged actions as something “not even a dog would do”.”
Find article here.

Health Care Complaints Commission v Farrell [2017] NSWCATOD 160

Decision date: 6 November 2017
“Health Practitioner Regulation National Law – Medical Radiation Practice (Radiology) – objectives and principles of the National Law – principles binding the Tribunal – unsatisfactory disciplinary conduct – meaning and principles to be applied – professional misconduct – meaning and principles to be applied – impairment – meaning and principles to be applied – competence – meaning and principles to be applied – suitability to practise – meaning and principles to be applied.”
Find decision here.

Red Cross: $6 Million Meant to Fight Ebola Was Stolen Through Fraud

Time, 6 November 2017
Authors: Clarence Roy-Macaulay, Krista Larson
“Fraud by Red Cross workers and others wasted at least $6 million meant to fight the deadly Ebola outbreak in West Africa, the organization confirmed Saturday. The revelations follow an internal investigation of how the organization handled more than $124 million during the 2014-2016 epidemic that killed more than 11,000 people in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea.”
Find article here.

Henkelman v Psychology Council of NSW [2017] NSWCATOD 161

Decision date: 8 November 2017
“Application for dismissal of appeal pursuant to s 55(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 – principles to be applied. In summary, the Council: (1) Noted a pattern of complaints that raised concerns that Mr Henkelman either did not understand, or was in wilful disregard of his professional responsibilities in relation to professional boundaries; (2) Found that those complaints also raised concerns in regard to Mr Henkelman’s ability to communicate professionally and effectively.”
Find article here.

Insurers discriminating against people who get genetic test results could hobble research, bioethicists warn

SMH, 8 November 2017
Author: Kate Aubusson
“Insurers are able to discriminate against individuals who undergo genetic testing, and that threatens to hobble genomic research, bioethics and law experts have warned in a recent paper published in Public Health Genomics. Anyone who receives their results of genetic testing as part of a research project needs to disclose them to insurers if asked, despite the Human Genetics Society of Australasia calling for research findings to be excluded. Insurers can deny cover or hike up premiums for healthy individuals who discover they carry a mutation for a condition they may never develop based on the testing results, the authors warned.”
Find article here.

Does section 63 of the Mental Health Act 1983 disempower patients with mental illness? Analysis of the case law

Medico-Legal Journal, 2 November 2017
Author: Bhanuka Senasinghe
“In England and Wales, detained psychiatric inpatients are treated under section 63 of the Mental Health Act 1983. This paper critically analyses the relevant law and considers the arbitrary distinctions between consent for treatments for mental illnesses and physical conditions, which may disempower patients with mental illness. Section 63 states that (for detained psychiatric patients) consent for medical treatment for patients’ mental disorder is not required. The treating clinician responsible for a patient decides what this medical treatment entails. This article focuses on three main legal cases: B v Croydon Health Authority, Tameside and Glossop v CH and Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust v RC and considers whether s 63 disempowers patients with mental illnesses.”
Find article here.