Mr HATTON - 1999-11-25
During yesterday’s Question Time, the member for Wanguri tabled a letter which raised serious allegations about surgical procedures which occurred at Royal Darwin Hospital and, by inference at least, seriously questioned the propriety and professionalism of all the medical professionals at the hospital. Can the minister assure this House that these allegations will be fully investigated?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I was saddened this morning to see yet another headline criticising Royal Darwin Hospital. It is a sad thing that the very good services that Territorians get from this institution are criticised in such an emotional and outrageous way.
Yesterday, we had a letter tabled in this House by the opposition health spokesman that raised 3 allegations. Two of those were of a very serious nature. They alleged that operations took place without the prior consent of the patient. The reason for this letter being tabled was the so-called lack of an interpreter service and the question was directed to the Chief Minister.
It is important that we understand how Royal Darwin Hospital goes about the very important business of communicating with its patients and its doctors. All members know that many of the people who attend Royal Darwin Hospital come from remote areas. Many of them are not familiar with the hospital setting and many of them have some difficulty in comprehending English. That is why we have the Patients Assisted Travel scheme, which last year flew some 3500 escorts into hospitals around the Territory, costing Territory Health the sum of $750 000.
The scheme responds to the judgment of clinicians in the bush that the patients they are sending to Royal Darwin may need some assistance with their clinical outcomes and may need some social assistance in terms of interpretation and the comfort of the staff here at Royal Darwin. The scheme is a very good one, but it does not measure up to the high standards that some would ask - that the people accompanying their relatives into town be qualified interpreters. I doubt whether that would ever be achievable.
We have a good system. We bring in a family member who is aware of the cultural norms and circumstances of the patient. They are there to provide some discussion between the patient and the clinician. I was upset to see the headline this morning, because it’s not mindful of the good work that’s in place.
Let us look, then, to the letter. The headline made me upset, but what the opposition has done has made me angry. The story has raised some possible illegal activity. That’s what is alleged. The allegations in the letter say that consent has not been obtained. This is not an issue of interpreting services - this is a matter of surgical procedures being performed without the consent of the patient. This is a very, very serious matter. If it came to my attention I would do something about it immediately.
I’m a bit disappointed that those opposite choose to use Royal Darwin and the patients there as a plaything yet again, instead of using the appropriate route to pursue this matter, which should be well known to the members opposite. If members in this House are aware of an allegation of criminal behaviour, which is pretty much what we’re talking about here, they should pursue that matter instead of brandishing letters in this House and making wild accusations. It is possible that the accusations are, in fact, fabrications. I’ll leave that to competent authorities to look at.
I am aware that the doctor who made the allegations on Drive Time yesterday, when the reporter asked him what the sterilisation was for, said: ‘I’m not sure. I’m not sure of the specific case’. The reporter questioned him further and he said: ‘I doubt very much that an 18-year-old would be asking for a sterilisation’.
What is her situation now? She presented to a gynaecologist in the Territory for an investigation into infertility. This is not even his patient. This is gossip he has heard in the tearoom or something. He has put it in a letter. He has given it to that man there, who has come into this House and tabled it.
We have decided to pursue this matter through formal channels. Last night I wrote to Paul Bauert, the president of the AMA, to see if the AMA did in fact endorse the comments made by one of its spokesmen. I table that letter. I wrote to Dr David Cox, the chairman of the Medical Registration Board, and asked him to investigate the examples cited as example 1 and example 2 in the letter.
Ms Martin: Why don’t you properly give the ...
Mr DUNHAM: You listen, because this is the formal channel. This is how you do it. You don’t do it in a flippant and frivolous way. The chairman of the Registration Board has the capacity to investigate matters like this. It is not appropriate that the minister investigate them himself personally, nor even that he know declassifications from all the doctors. I have asked him to do that on my behalf and report back, particularly on the allegation that non-consensual sterilisations of older Aboriginal women are routinely and commonly performed in the Northern Territory. The doctor in the paper yesterday has blown the whistle on his colleagues and I want them pursued, because if this is continuing in our hospitals it should be ceased forthwith.
I table the letter to Dr David Cox. I table also a memo to the secretary of my department because, again, it is not really my position to be castigating, reproving, disciplining staff. That is a matter for the head of my department. It is, however, a matter for this House since the papers have been tabled here. I note that there are some serious breaches of the code of conduct that the Commissioner for Public Employment has put in place, and I will ask that this House be apprised of that as it goes.
I wrote also to the news director of Channel 8, given that at least one news broadcaster had given the impression to viewers of that station that this man was in fact speaking on behalf of Royal Darwin Hospital. I can understand that a mistake of this nature could be made because he was aided and abetted by those opposite who made outrageous, unfounded allegations about potentially illegal actions.
Members opposite are now saying they knew about this for years. They have done nothing about it. It is the sort of thing that goes before courts. It is the sort of thing that goes before medical registration boards. This is the type of action that you can get away with in little gossip sessions and sitting around barbecues, but it is not the business of this House to be used in such a frivolous fashion. It is frivolous to brings issues in here that can be taken to appropriate channels, to brandish them around, get a headline condemning the good work at Royal Darwin Hospital and virtually asking the minister to investigate the treating habits of doctors at Royal Darwin Hospital who, if the allegation is correct, are flouting the law.
This is something that will be taken further. I am aware that the House is in recess for some time, but I will pursue this matter and when the House sits again early in the new year I will report on the outcomes of it. If the allegations have any bearing, any truth to them, I will report the actions that will take place to make sure that illegal activity of this type desists forthwith.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I was saddened this morning to see yet another headline criticising Royal Darwin Hospital. It is a sad thing that the very good services that Territorians get from this institution are criticised in such an emotional and outrageous way.
Yesterday, we had a letter tabled in this House by the opposition health spokesman that raised 3 allegations. Two of those were of a very serious nature. They alleged that operations took place without the prior consent of the patient. The reason for this letter being tabled was the so-called lack of an interpreter service and the question was directed to the Chief Minister.
It is important that we understand how Royal Darwin Hospital goes about the very important business of communicating with its patients and its doctors. All members know that many of the people who attend Royal Darwin Hospital come from remote areas. Many of them are not familiar with the hospital setting and many of them have some difficulty in comprehending English. That is why we have the Patients Assisted Travel scheme, which last year flew some 3500 escorts into hospitals around the Territory, costing Territory Health the sum of $750 000.
The scheme responds to the judgment of clinicians in the bush that the patients they are sending to Royal Darwin may need some assistance with their clinical outcomes and may need some social assistance in terms of interpretation and the comfort of the staff here at Royal Darwin. The scheme is a very good one, but it does not measure up to the high standards that some would ask - that the people accompanying their relatives into town be qualified interpreters. I doubt whether that would ever be achievable.
We have a good system. We bring in a family member who is aware of the cultural norms and circumstances of the patient. They are there to provide some discussion between the patient and the clinician. I was upset to see the headline this morning, because it’s not mindful of the good work that’s in place.
Let us look, then, to the letter. The headline made me upset, but what the opposition has done has made me angry. The story has raised some possible illegal activity. That’s what is alleged. The allegations in the letter say that consent has not been obtained. This is not an issue of interpreting services - this is a matter of surgical procedures being performed without the consent of the patient. This is a very, very serious matter. If it came to my attention I would do something about it immediately.
I’m a bit disappointed that those opposite choose to use Royal Darwin and the patients there as a plaything yet again, instead of using the appropriate route to pursue this matter, which should be well known to the members opposite. If members in this House are aware of an allegation of criminal behaviour, which is pretty much what we’re talking about here, they should pursue that matter instead of brandishing letters in this House and making wild accusations. It is possible that the accusations are, in fact, fabrications. I’ll leave that to competent authorities to look at.
I am aware that the doctor who made the allegations on Drive Time yesterday, when the reporter asked him what the sterilisation was for, said: ‘I’m not sure. I’m not sure of the specific case’. The reporter questioned him further and he said: ‘I doubt very much that an 18-year-old would be asking for a sterilisation’.
What is her situation now? She presented to a gynaecologist in the Territory for an investigation into infertility. This is not even his patient. This is gossip he has heard in the tearoom or something. He has put it in a letter. He has given it to that man there, who has come into this House and tabled it.
We have decided to pursue this matter through formal channels. Last night I wrote to Paul Bauert, the president of the AMA, to see if the AMA did in fact endorse the comments made by one of its spokesmen. I table that letter. I wrote to Dr David Cox, the chairman of the Medical Registration Board, and asked him to investigate the examples cited as example 1 and example 2 in the letter.
Ms Martin: Why don’t you properly give the ...
Mr DUNHAM: You listen, because this is the formal channel. This is how you do it. You don’t do it in a flippant and frivolous way. The chairman of the Registration Board has the capacity to investigate matters like this. It is not appropriate that the minister investigate them himself personally, nor even that he know declassifications from all the doctors. I have asked him to do that on my behalf and report back, particularly on the allegation that non-consensual sterilisations of older Aboriginal women are routinely and commonly performed in the Northern Territory. The doctor in the paper yesterday has blown the whistle on his colleagues and I want them pursued, because if this is continuing in our hospitals it should be ceased forthwith.
I table the letter to Dr David Cox. I table also a memo to the secretary of my department because, again, it is not really my position to be castigating, reproving, disciplining staff. That is a matter for the head of my department. It is, however, a matter for this House since the papers have been tabled here. I note that there are some serious breaches of the code of conduct that the Commissioner for Public Employment has put in place, and I will ask that this House be apprised of that as it goes.
I wrote also to the news director of Channel 8, given that at least one news broadcaster had given the impression to viewers of that station that this man was in fact speaking on behalf of Royal Darwin Hospital. I can understand that a mistake of this nature could be made because he was aided and abetted by those opposite who made outrageous, unfounded allegations about potentially illegal actions.
Members opposite are now saying they knew about this for years. They have done nothing about it. It is the sort of thing that goes before courts. It is the sort of thing that goes before medical registration boards. This is the type of action that you can get away with in little gossip sessions and sitting around barbecues, but it is not the business of this House to be used in such a frivolous fashion. It is frivolous to brings issues in here that can be taken to appropriate channels, to brandish them around, get a headline condemning the good work at Royal Darwin Hospital and virtually asking the minister to investigate the treating habits of doctors at Royal Darwin Hospital who, if the allegation is correct, are flouting the law.
This is something that will be taken further. I am aware that the House is in recess for some time, but I will pursue this matter and when the House sits again early in the new year I will report on the outcomes of it. If the allegations have any bearing, any truth to them, I will report the actions that will take place to make sure that illegal activity of this type desists forthwith.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016