I came home from a long day at work to a pleasant surprise - a letter from the Ministry of Health giving more details on the proposed amendments to the Medical Registration Act - specifically on the appointment of a legal professional as a chairperson to a SMC Disciplinary Tribunal - and seeking further feedback from doctors.
As usual I read the letter from the end to the beginning - it helps to know early who approved it, and what they really want - and as usual it helped me notice a little irregularity in the argument.
In section 8. of Annex A (the FAQ), we learn that one of the reason for the proposed amendment is the fact that the DC occasionally committed errors when in comes to the issue of legalities.
So why can't we solve that problem by having legal professionals assist the DC?
Section 4. tells us that the DC is indeed assisted by Legal Assessors, lawyers of at least 10 years of experience.
However, since DCs commit errors of legalities despite being assisted by experienced lawyers, it tells us that even experienced lawyers make mistakes and therefore in some more legally complicated cases, the DC should be chaired by an experienced lawyer or an ex-judge. Makes perfect sense, doesn't it?
It also tells us that a lawyer or a legal professional acting as the chairperson actually displaces the layperson from the DC, so that instead of 3 doctors and a layperson, assisted by a lawyer, we now have 3 doctors and a lawyer. Furthermore, the decision to appoint a legal professional as the chairperson of a DC lies with the council, so that instead of a DC made up of three doctors and one layperson not of the council's choosing, we have a DC of three doctors and one legal professional of the council's choice.
And the reason why we are doing that?
Because it makes it look like we are being less partial.
See? It always makes sense when you begin at the end, and work your way up...
2 comments:
This looks like the beginning of the end for doctors in the sense that you guys are losing autonomy as a profession.
I can't imagine having doctors on our disciplinary committees for the legal profession.
It starts with one step. Sooner than later we will see more non-doctors in the disciplinary committees in future.
I predict that in future we will see the DC for the medical profession made up of mostly non-doctors, more lawyers but assisted by non-member medical advisers.
In a way this is a triumph for the layman. Amazing how the medical profession allowed things to get to this stage. However you look at it, have only yourselves to blame.
Huh? Did you even read the post?
Post a Comment