Tarnished image of Medical Council
Jun 17th 2001, 3:48 pm
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
EDITORIAL Tarnished image
Prev. Story
After Wednesday's judgment on the doctor who conducted a
telephone call during surgery, the public is entitled to ask
whether there is any point in having a Medical Council in
Hong Kong.
It has been fiercely criticised many times as little more than
a closed brotherhood banding together to protect the interests
of members. But this time the council's blinkered view warrants
more than mere concern. The subject of the telephone call is
immaterial. An operating theatre should be a wholly sterile
area devoid of anything likely to distract a surgeon in the
course of his work.
This patient suffered a perforated bowel and had to have a
second operation, but this, we learn, is simply a common
complication of the procedure and nothing to do with the fact
that a doctor who has scrubbed up and donned a surgical gown,
cap and mask, somehow
- incredibly - failed to notice he was wired up to a microphone and ear piece.
It speaks volumes about the attitude in some medical circles
that some colleagues of the surgeon are urging him to lodge an
appeal against an earlier Hospital Authority hearing which
found him guilty of serious misconduct and blocked his salary
increases and promotion prospects for five years.
Is it any wonder there is a widely held opinion that too many
contemporary Hong Kong doctors are overly self-interested and
more concerned with the business side of medicine than with the
ethical standards that have been inculcated on their
predecessors?
If the body charged with upholding those standards is so ready
to relax them, what chance is there that attitudes will change
and clinical practice will improve? There was an outcry last
year after a surgeon who removed a pregnant woman's uterus,
therefore ending the life of her unborn child and any prospect
of the woman bearing others, was simply issued with a warning
letter. Council chairman Dr Lee Kin-hung - the man expected to
make the body more transparent - responded then by telling
"outsiders" not to comment on internal matters. What he should
be doing is assuring members of the public that the council has
their interests at heart. Even council members have expressed
concern that colleagues put their electorate first. Of eight
panel members on Wednesday, only one was a layman.
Doctors complain that a compensation culture is making it
difficult for them to work. But if people cannot look to the
Medical Council to redress complaints, can they be blamed for
taking legal action? The council's image is badly tarnished.
Patients have no confidence in it and that reflects badly on
the profession it represents. The appointment of a health
ombudsman who can act as an independent arbiter seems the only
way to ensure justice for both sides.
Prev. Story
After Wednesday's judgment on the doctor who conducted a
telephone call during surgery, the public is entitled to ask
whether there is any point in having a Medical Council in
Hong Kong.
It has been fiercely criticised many times as little more than
a closed brotherhood banding together to protect the interests
of members. But this time the council's blinkered view warrants
more than mere concern. The subject of the telephone call is
immaterial. An operating theatre should be a wholly sterile
area devoid of anything likely to distract a surgeon in the
course of his work.
This patient suffered a perforated bowel and had to have a
second operation, but this, we learn, is simply a common
complication of the procedure and nothing to do with the fact
that a doctor who has scrubbed up and donned a surgical gown,
cap and mask, somehow
- incredibly - failed to notice he was wired up to a microphone and ear piece.
It speaks volumes about the attitude in some medical circles
that some colleagues of the surgeon are urging him to lodge an
appeal against an earlier Hospital Authority hearing which
found him guilty of serious misconduct and blocked his salary
increases and promotion prospects for five years.
Is it any wonder there is a widely held opinion that too many
contemporary Hong Kong doctors are overly self-interested and
more concerned with the business side of medicine than with the
ethical standards that have been inculcated on their
predecessors?
If the body charged with upholding those standards is so ready
to relax them, what chance is there that attitudes will change
and clinical practice will improve? There was an outcry last
year after a surgeon who removed a pregnant woman's uterus,
therefore ending the life of her unborn child and any prospect
of the woman bearing others, was simply issued with a warning
letter. Council chairman Dr Lee Kin-hung - the man expected to
make the body more transparent - responded then by telling
"outsiders" not to comment on internal matters. What he should
be doing is assuring members of the public that the council has
their interests at heart. Even council members have expressed
concern that colleagues put their electorate first. Of eight
panel members on Wednesday, only one was a layman.
Doctors complain that a compensation culture is making it
difficult for them to work. But if people cannot look to the
Medical Council to redress complaints, can they be blamed for
taking legal action? The council's image is badly tarnished.
Patients have no confidence in it and that reflects badly on
the profession it represents. The appointment of a health
ombudsman who can act as an independent arbiter seems the only
way to ensure justice for both sides.
