×

[Correspondence] Protecting health care in armed conflict: action towards accountability

Driven by a deplorable trend of unlawful attacks on health-care facilities and workers in armed conflicts throughout the world, on May 3, 2016, the UN Security Council (UNSC) adopted Resolution 2286 calling for an end to such attacks.1 The Secretary-General followed with recommendations of concrete measures for implementation.2 However, unlawful attacks on health care have continued or intensified in many conflicts, notably in Syria. We, academic institutions, civil society, and co-sponsoring Member States, convened a side event during the 72nd UN General Assembly to focus global attention on this issue and the imperative that Resolution 2286 be implemented.

Mandatory reporting burden to be eased

 

New, nationally consistent laws will ensure doctors are no longer obliged to report colleagues under their care to AHPRA over mental health issues.

In a statement following last week’s meeting of the COAG Health Council, Federal, State and Territory Health Ministers agreed unanimously to “strengthen the law to remove barriers for registered health professionals to seek appropriate treatment for impairments including mental health”.

They agreed to a nationally consistent approach with “exemptions from the reporting of notifiable conduct by treating practitioners”, with new legislation that will have to be passed by the various State and Territory legislative bodies. Western Australia already has such laws, which it says it will retain as is.

Currently, doctors in all states other than Western Australia are legally obliged to report the mental health impairments of any registered health professional under their care to AHPRA or the Medical Board of Australia. In some cases, this can lead to a suspension of a doctor’s registration and right to practise. The issue of mandatory reporting has been a point of simmering tension in the medical community following a tragic spate of doctor suicides. The AMA, the RACGP and other representative bodies have argued that under the current regime, doctors battling with depression or other mental health issues often avoid seeking help for fear of being reported to AHPRA and losing their registration.

Under the new approach, doctors would still be under the obligation to report “past, present and the risk of future sexual misconduct”, as well as “current and the risk of future instances of intoxication at work and practices outside of accepted standards”.

The statement from the COAG Health Council meeting has been met with cautious approval from doctors’ organisations. AMA President Dr Michael Gannon said the Ministers had acknowledged the AMA’s concerns and that he was confident better laws could be crafted and implemented.

“It is clear that all the Health Ministers are committed to removing barriers from doctors seeking help from other doctors about their mental health or stress-related conditions,” he said.

But he took issue with some of the wording in the COAG statement, in particular with regard to the “future misconduct” of health professionals.

“It is unreasonable and unworkable to expect treating doctors to predict the future behaviour of any patients, including their colleagues,” he noted.

The RACGP’s response was a little more measured. The GP body described the COAG statement as a step in the right direction, but cautioned that it left “significant room for doubt and confusion”.

RACGP President Dr Bastien Seidel said the proposed changes were “short on detail” and that the retention of requirements for reporting a health professional practising “at a lower standard” left doubt for doctors seeking healthcare.

“Much of the conduct identified as grounds for mandatory reporting is subjective, open to interpretation by both the health professional and their treating practitioner,” he said.

“If there is room for doubt on what should or shouldn’t be reported, the fundamental issue of there being barriers to healthcare remains,” he added.

AMSA, the body representing Australia’s 17,000 medical students, applauded the rethink on mandatory reporting.

“It sends a strong message about the culture of medicine, that we encourage people to talk about their mental health, to seek help early, and that doctors who find themselves on the other side as patients deserve the same access to care as everyone else,” the body said in a statement.

But it also was worried about the wording around future misconduct.

“Predicting future behaviour is a complicated area, and leaving this as grounds to affect a doctor’s registration and career is troubling. In revision of the reporting procedures, we hope that it is remembered that the aim is to help doctors, not punish them.”

AMA cautiously welcomes moves on mandatory reporting

Australia’s Health Ministers have made moves towards removing barriers that discourage doctors from seeking help from other doctors about their own mental health.

Federal, State and Territory Health Ministers met in Sydney on April 13 to discuss a range of national health issues, with mandatory reporting high on the agenda.

AMA President Dr Michael Gannon addressed the COAG Health Council during the Ministers’ mandatory reporting deliberations.

He subsequently said the meeting’s outcome showed that the Ministers had acknowledged the AMA’s concerns and, with ongoing goodwill, discussion and consultation, could arrive at much better laws than currently exist.

Dr Gannon said the AMA cautiously welcomed the agreed strategy for mandatory reporting laws that emerged from the meeting.

“It is clear that all the Health Ministers are committed to removing barriers from doctors seeking help from other doctors about their mental health or stress-related conditions,” Dr Gannon said directly after the meeting.

“There are concerns about some of the wording in today’s communiqué, including in regard to the ‘future misconduct’ of health professionals.

“It is unreasonable and unworkable to expect treating doctors to predict the future behaviour of any patients, including their colleagues.

“But I am sure we can work through this with the Ministers in the drafting of the legislation.

“The AMA looks forward to working with the COAG Health Council in getting the wording right in the legislation to ensure that doctors get access to the care and support they need.

“The positive signals in today’s communiqué give us some confidence that acceptable nationally consistent mandatory reporting laws are within reach.”

Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt said caring for the mental health of registered health professionals was an important area of agreement reached in the meeting.

“Until now, there have been significant unintended barriers to doctors and nurses seeking the appropriate mental health treatment because of mandatory reporting requirements,” Mr Hunt said.

“What has been agreed is a system that will both protect patients, but critically, remove barriers to doctors and nurses receiving and accessing the mental health treatment that they want.

“Removing barriers whilst protecting patients with important provisions, to ensure that there is not practice which is detrimental to those patients.

“But it’s critical. It has been developed in conjunction with the medical professionals and the final legislation will be developed in consultation with the States and Territories and medical professionals.

“But at the end of the day, the clear message is the barriers to doctors and nurses accessing mental health are going to be removed. And that’s critical to accessing mental health treatment.”

The mandatory reporting section of the COAG Health Council communiqué reads:

“Today Ministers agreed unanimously to take steps to protect patients and strengthen the law to remove barriers for registered health professionals to seek appropriate treatment for impairments including mental health.

“Ministers agreed to a nationally consistent approach to mandatory reporting which will be drafted and proposes exemptions from the reporting of notifiable conduct by treating practitioners (noting Western Australia’s current arrangements are retained) and subject to other jurisdictional formal approval in certain circumstances.

“The legislation will include strong protection for patients and will remove barriers for registered health professionals to seek appropriate treatment. The legislation will specifically include a requirement to report past, present and the risk of future sexual misconduct and a requirement to report current and the risk of future instances of intoxication at work and practice outside of accepted standards.

“Western Australia endorsed continuance of its current approach that has been operational in WA since 2010 for treating health practitioners. Health practitioners in a treating relationship based on the reasonable belief can make a voluntary notification as part of their ethical obligations in relation to any type of misconduct.”

CHRIS JOHNSON

AMA welcomes ice inquiry report

The Joint Parliamentary Committee Inquiry on Law Enforcement has released its Inquiry into Crystal Methamphetamine (ice) Report.

It has recognised drug and alcohol addiction to be a serious illness and should be treated as such.

The AMA has welcomed the findings, which also state that demand for drug and alcohol treatment services often outweighs capacity.

And there is a need to tailor services to suit a variety of needs, including post care services.

The importance of accountability for those bodies who fund alcohol and drug treatment services was also stressed, as was the need to rebalance funding across the National Drug Strategy.

AMA President Dr Michael Gannon said the AMA believes that any substance dependence is a serious health condition, and that those impacted should be treated like other patients with serious illness and be offered the best available treatments and supports to recover.

“We welcome the recommendations that recognise the stigma associated with addiction, and seek to increase compassionate responses, including media reporting,” Dr Gannon said.

“This is essential if we are going to encourage people to seek treatment.”

The release of the report also serves as a timely reminder of the statement made by the Head of the National Ice Taskforce, Ken Ley: “That we cannot arrest our way out of the problem.”

The AMA supports the recommendations to monitor and ultimately reduce the time take for people to access appropriate treatment. It is also great that the importance of pre- and post- care is recognised.

“The AMA is particularly pleased to see the recommendation that the Department of Health work with Primary Health Networks (PHNs) to improve their tender processes for drug and alcohol treatment,” Dr Gannon said.

“We believe that the PHNs must be accountable for the services, wait times and the quality of the drug and alcohol treatment services provided in their jurisdictions.”

The approach (established under the National Ice Action Plan) is new and the capacity of PHNs to oversee the effective and equitable delivery of drug and alcohol treatment services is yet to be fully established.

The report recognises the importance of culturally and linguistically appropriate drug and alcohol treatment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This work should include efforts to increase the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander drug and alcohol workforce, it noted.

The report contains a recommendation to collect data on the use of illicit drugs in correctional facilities which will provide some valuable insights, but it is vitally important that rehabilitation and treatment services are available to those people who are in the corrections system noting drug and alcohol addiction is often a key contributor to incarceration.

“We must also recognise the link between mental health and addiction, and the report misses an important opportunity reiterate this and advocate for increased linkages between the sectors,” Dr Gannon said.

“The Inquiry Report is certainly on the right track in many areas relating to drug and alcohol addiction.

“This is in stark contrast to the Government’s current efforts to pass legislation (Social Services Legislation Amendment Drug Testing Trial Bill 2018) that will drug test welfare recipients.

“This punitive measure will increase the stigma associated with drug addiction, and is not supported by evidence. The reality is that it will increase the demand for drug treatment services that are clearly under significant pressure. Throwing money at the trial sites won’t fix the problem.”

The AMA encourages Social Services Minister Dan Tehan to read the Inquiry report to better understand the problems in the sector, and withdraw the random drug testing proposal until such time that we can improve the capacity of the sector to meet demand for drug treatment.

“We must not do anything to increase the delays for those individuals actively seeking treatment,” Dr Gannon said.

“Referring those who test positive under the welfare trial will do this.”

The AMA Submission to the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Law Enforcement Inquiry into crystal methamphetamine can be found at: submission/ama-submission-joint-parliamentary-committee-law-enforcement-%E2%80%93-inquiry-crystal

The AMA Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee’s Inquiry into the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 can be found at: submission/ama-submission-senate-community-affairs-legislation-committees-inquiry-social-services

AMA Position Statement on Methamphetamine can be found at: position-statement/methamphetamine-2015

AMA Position Statement on Harmful substance abuse, dependence and behavioural addiction can be found at: position-statement/harmful-substance-use-dependence-and-behavioural-addiction-addiction-2017

CHRIS JOHNSON

Senate Inquiry says cyberbullying is a health issue

The AMA welcomes the recommendations of the Inquiry into the Adequacy of existing offences in the Commonwealth Criminal Code and of State and Territory criminal laws to capture cyberbullying.

Many of the recommendations are consistent with AMA submissions and policy.

AMA President Dr Michael Gannon said the AMA was pleased to see the inquiry state, in no uncertain terms, that bullying is a public health issue.

“Framing bullying as a public health issue reiterates the need to invest in prevention and early intervention opportunities, rather than merely punishing offenders once bullying has occurred,” Dr Gannon said.

“The AMA acknowledges that increasing the penalties for cyber bullying fails to address the root of the problem, or prevent the harm done by cyber bullying.

“Initiatives which seek to educate children and young people about the real and tragic harms caused by cyber bullying provide a far more productive way forward.

“The notion of a duty of care being imposed on social media platforms is a welcome acknowledgement of the increasing amount of time that children and young people are spending in these online and virtual spaces.”

As young people spend an increasing amount of time inhabiting these virtual spaces, the providers of these platforms should be bound by the same duty of care that we have come to expect from physical service providers such as restaurants, cinemas and sporting centres, Dr Gannon said.

The AMA acknowledges the effectiveness of the eSafety Commissioner could be improved by making it easier for the Commissioner to access relevant data from local and overseas-hosted social media services.

The AMA remains broadly supportive of the role of the eSafety Commissioner in reducing the harm associated with cyber-bullying, noting the importance of continued monitoring and evaluation of this position as it evolves.

“We have previously identified the role of schools and parents in educating children and young people about the dangers of physical and cyber bullying,” Dr Gannon said.

“This should also be complemented by strategies which seek to build resilience, coping strategies and help-seeking behaviours in young people who experience bullying.

“Many young people who experience bullying are reluctant to report their experiences. Interventions which rely on self-reporting of bullying instances can only have limited success.”

It is estimated that about one in four Australian students experience bullying.

General Practitioners can provide a confidential and safe avenue for children and young people to discuss any bullying they have experienced, or for parents looking to support their children with these challenges.

“Viewing bullying as a public health issue acts as a pertinent reminder for all Australians to consider the way in which our own behaviour contributes to a culture in which children and young people learn that bullying is acceptable,” Dr Gannon said.

CHRIS JOHNSON

Psychiatrist’s $64,000 discharge error

A court has found a psychiatrist breached their duty of care to a patient for the injuries she sustained in a car accident while driving home following discharge from the hospital.

The patient alleged that at the time of her discharge, she was excessively tired and/or sedated and should not have been permitted to drive home. She claimed the psychiatrist and admitting hospital’s negligent conduct had caused her to lose control of the car and sustain personal injuries.

In reaching its decision, the court considered a range of evidence from the psychiatrist, hospital, witnesses, experts, as well as medical notes and letters.

Ultimately, the court found the psychiatrist and the hospital each liable for negligence, and apportioned responsibility between them. The hospital and the psychiatrist were ordered to pay the patient $32,167 and $64,333, respectively, plus costs.

The case highlights the risks when discharging patients potentially under the influence of sedating and psychoactive agents, and the importance of conducting and documenting a careful assessment before allowing any unattended patient to drive home.

Car accident following discharge

The patient was a woman with a background as a registered nurse, who had been terminated from her job due to absences because of back pain following a work accident. She visited her GP complaining of depression and feeling suicidal, and was admitted to an acute hospital’s mental health unit for about a month. She was then admitted as a voluntary inpatient, to a private hospital under the psychiatrist.

During her admission, which lasted another month, she suffered both insomnia and daytime tiredness. She was taking multiple psychoactive drugs including antidepressants, opiates and other strong analgesics as well as Stilnox at night.

During a consultation the day prior to the patient’s discharge, the psychiatrist assessed her readiness for discharge in relation to her mental state. The patient was able to assure the psychiatrist she was no longer suicidal and the psychiatrist authorised discharge for the next day.

On the morning of discharge, the patient took her regularly prescribed OxyContin. Prior to discharging her in the afternoon, a nurse completed a driving risk assessment and then returned the patient’s car keys so she could drive the 50 kilometre journey home. Unfortunately, the patient drove off the road and into a wall, quite close to home.

She was taken by ambulance and treated at an acute hospital for her injuries, including pain in her neck, head, shoulder, lower back and leg. She was then re-admitted to the private hospital under the original psychiatrist, where she remained for another month.

Court’s findings

The court heard in the days prior to discharge, the patient was often excessively drowsy and would fall asleep even while sitting eating meals. On the day of discharge, the patient had again fallen asleep over breakfast. Nursing staff had tried to wake her on several occasions, but she kept falling back asleep.

The court noted medical records from the hospital in which staff had reported the patient appeared over-sedated and drowsy. The nurse’s risk assessment completed at the time of discharge, also stated, “reports tiredness lately – Psych aware”.

Given the “overwhelming evidence”, the court found the patient was tired, drowsy and sedated upon discharge.

“I find she was not in a fit state to make a decision about her capacity to drive and find that she relied upon her carers to advise as to whether or not it was safe for her to drive herself home and warn her of the risks of drowsiness,” the court said.

The court concluded the car accident occurred as a result of the patient falling asleep due to tiredness, fatigue or excessive sedation.

Psychiatrist’s grounds for negligence

While the psychiatrist conceded the scope of their duty of care extended to reasonable care of treatment, they sought to deflect liability on the basis of s50 of the Civil Liability Act (CLA), claiming they had acted in a manner which at the time was widely accepted in Australia by peer professional opinion as competent professional practise.

In determining the psychiatrist had breached their duty of care to the patient, the court noted they had granted the patient permission to drive her car and was the sole person with control over whether the patient drove. Based on hospital protocol, staff could only give the keys to the patient with the psychiatrist’s permission.

The court accepted the patient’s evidence she had expressed concern to the psychiatrist about driving due to drowsiness, to which the psychiatrist had responded, “you should be fine to drive.”

The court found that at no stage during the consultation before her discharge, did the psychiatrist discuss how she would travel home. Furthermore, the psychiatrist admitted they left the decision up to the patient as to whether she was fit to drive.

“To leave it up to a psychiatric patient who suffered from pain, fatigue and sedation, which would vary from day to day, to decide whether to she was fit to drive at the time of discharge, is a complete abrogation of the psychiatrist’s duty of care and responsibility,” the court said.

The psychiatrist was also found negligent by failing to review the patient or enquire about her condition on the actual day of discharge, despite her observations of the patient the day before discharge and personal knowledge of the patient’s sedation, as evident in the records and other correspondence.

In a letter to the patient’s insurer, the psychiatrist had reported increased sedation over the last week which the introduction of OxyContin may have caused. Another letter to a neurologist said in the three days prior to discharge, the patient was “excessively sedated” and had some semi-falls.

The court accepted expert opinion that in allowing the patient in such a state to drive unattended, the psychiatrist and hospital breached accepted professional standards, and had not acted in a manner which would be widely accepted by peer professional opinion.

Hospital breaches duty of care

The hospital argued they had relied upon the fact the psychiatrist had authorised the patient to drive, as well as the patient’s own assessment of her capacity to drive and knowledge of the effects of the medication, given she was a registered nurse. The court rejected these defences.

The hospital was found to have breached its duty of care to the patient for permitting her to drive following discharge in circumstances where she was unfit to drive.

No basis for patient’s contributory negligence

The court rejected claims made by the hospital and psychiatrist against the patient that her actions constituted “contributory negligence”, by failing to take reasonable precautions against her risk of harm. The court found the sedating effects of the medications impeded her ability to make a responsible decision in the circumstances.

Key lessons

  • Doctors and hospitals have a responsibility to carefully assess the safety of their patients being discharged from their care. This includes identifying suitable arrangements for transport home and may require prolonging admission if no arrangements can be organised.
  • Doctors should remain aware of the risk of excessive sedation of patients taking psychoactive agents, especially in combination, and carefully assess their risk for harms. In preparing patients for discharge it is good practice to carefully review their use of sedating medications and other risky agents warranting special advice. This of course extends to showing caution when prescribing sedating medication in the community including sleeping tablets, strong analgesics and psychoactive agents, and adequately warning of the risks.
  • Doctors should always carefully document their assessments of patients, especially in higher-risk contexts such as transitioning from care. It is important to record the relevant positive and negative findings which would justify discharge and to outline the discussed options and agreed plan.

This article was originally published by Avant Mutual. You can access the original here.

Communiqué from March Federal Council meeting

DR BEVERLEY ROWBOTHAM, CHAIR, FEDERAL COUNCIL

Federal Council met in Canberra on March 16 and 17. Debate was robust as always and productive, with numerous Position Statements approved for adoption. These will be released to members and the public over coming weeks.

The President reported, as is our usual practice, in a town hall format, with questions of the President from Councillors and some debate. The President reported that the AMA had maintained a very high media profile over the summer period, with many press releases on summer lifestyle issues. These included avoiding heat stress, drinking in moderation, and driving safely. There were also significant Position Statements released, including the AMA Position Statement on Mental Health, which attracted a lot of positive interest from the mental health community.

In the week prior to the Federal Council meeting, the President had released the Public Hospital Report Card, highlighting the need for continued investment by Federal and State Governments in our public hospitals.

The major focus of discussion at this meeting was the recent actions of Bupa in announcing changes to its cover, which will impact doctors and patients alike. Federal Council urged the President to maintain his advocacy on the issue.

The Secretary General’s report again highlighted the scope of activity underway within the Federal AMA secretariat and the success of AMA advocacy on behalf of members;  workforce initiatives; the granting by the ACCC of a further authorisation to permit certain billing arrangements to benefit general practices; discussions with the Department of Health on its review of medical indemnity insurance schemes; the raft of reviews relevant to reforms to private health insurance; the ongoing MBS reviews, and much more.

Federal Council considered a proposal for the introduction of post nominal letters to denote membership of the AMA, a move that has been long in the gestation. Further work is required before the Board considers amendments to the By Laws to make provision for the introduction.

Another key discussion was the change to the format of National Conference this year with the introduction of a day of policy debate. This change is being made in response to feedback from delegates that the opportunity for debate on issues by delegates needed to be enhanced. Federal Council considered a number of draft policy resolutions put forward by the membership, which will be further refined before distribution to delegates attending National Conference. Participation in the debate on the resolutions will be open to all AMA members attending the Conference, whether as an appointed delegate or fee-paying member.

Public health working groups brought forward a Position Statement on Men’s Health, and on Drugs in Sport. Council debated the issue of funding of access to bariatric surgery in the public health system. It also agreed to establish two new working groups to look at the issues of child abuse and neglect, and health literacy.

The Ethics and Medico Legal Committee tabled a revision to the Guidelines for Doctors on Managing Conflicts of Interest in Medicine, which was approved by Council. It is part of a wider piece of work before the Committee, looking at relationships between medical practitioners and industry.

Federal Council approved a new Position Statement on Diagnostic Imaging; and another on Resourcing Aged Care. The latter is one of the many advocacy documents in development or under review as part of the AMA’s expanded work on aged care issues. Council noted the report on the recent AMA survey of doctors’ views about providing care in aged care settings, noting the anticipated decline in the number of practitioners providing care.

A recent meeting of the Health Financing and Economics Committee had considered the issue of value based care as a model with the potential to concurrently increase hospital efficiency and improve patient outcomes. Quality data is needed to inform this work within public hospitals.

The Task Force on Indigenous Health, which advises the President on issues relevant to Indigenous health, continues its close involvement with Close the Gap initiatives. Its 2017 report card on ear health continues to be well received.

The various Councils of Federal Council provided their reports. The Council of Private Specialist Practice is monitoring the various reviews of private health insurance, including out of pocket costs and options to manage low value care in mental health and rehabilitation.

The Council of Doctors in Training (DiTs) discussed proposed reforms to bonded medical workforce schemes. The AMA has been active in influencing changes to the schemes which the Council of DiTs has strongly endorsed. The Chair of the Council of DiTs reported on the very successful AMA Medical Workforce and Training Summit held on 3 March 2018. The Summit brought together more than 70 important stakeholders in medical workforce and training to discuss the concerns of the AMA and many others in the profession with the distribution of the medical workforce, the long-standing imbalance between generalist training and sub- specialisation, the workforce position of different specialties and the growing evidence of a specialty ‘training bottleneck’ and lack of subsequent consultant positions.

The Council of General Practice tabled two Position Statements for approval. The first dealt with General Practice Accreditation and the second provides a Framework for Evaluating Appropriate Outcome Measures.

Federal Council supported a motion put forward by the Council of General Practice to endorse funding of universal catch-up vaccines through the National Immunisation Program for anyone living in Australia wishing to become up to date with clinically appropriate NIP vaccinations, irrespective of age, race, country of origin and State or Territory of residence.

The Council of Rural Doctors reported on its recent meeting with the new Rural Health Commissioner, Professor Paul Worley and discussions on the national rural generalist pathway.

The final item of business, but by no means the least important, was the adoption by Federal Council of a position statement on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, which followed a detailed discussion on the Scheme at the November meeting of Council.

Federal Council now prepares for the National Conference and its last meeting with its current membership in May.  Elections are underway for several positions on the Council, evidence of increased member interest in its work.

 

Esther (in Australia)

*Please refer to Dr Sandra Hirowatari’s Rural Health column (16 April 2018 edition) for an explanation of the below story. 

Esther is exhausted. She can hear her two little grandsons in the kitchen scrounging for something to eat. She knows she should get up, but knows the throbbing headache she has now will be pounding once her feet hit the floor. “They’ll manage,” she says to herself. Manage or perish is kind of how it is around here.

She promised herself this month’s cheque wouldn’t be used to buy grog. She would have kept that commitment if her youngest son hadn’t showed up yesterday. Another bad week for Junior. He struggles with depression that gets so bad she worries he will someday just put an end to his life. She has seen so many young men in Port Good Hope commit suicide she shudders to think what her son may do if things don’t turn around for him.

Esther knows alcohol isn’t the solution to her son’s depression and she knows her sugars will be bad today after everything they drank last night. At least there is no reason to prick my finger, she thinks. I know what the number will be.

She remembers she’s supposed to go to the clinic today. Marie called to tell Esther about the appointment they have for her. Something about a new diabetic program. Esther’s heard that before. The doctors and nurses at the clinic are more concerned about my blood sugars than I am. They don’t have the rest of the stuff to worry about that I do. Finding money somehow to pay this month’s rent and buy a new electricity card to keep the power on and that damn collections agent threatening to take the ute back if I don’t come up with my payments before the end of the month. Let him come and try and find that truck. Good luck.

She hears the toddlers pulling a chair up to the kitchen cupboard looking for cereal to eat. She really should get up; those boys are too little to be climbing. “Why are they here with me?” she wonders. The memory is unclear but she thinks her daughter dropped them off late last night. Her son-in-law bought some alcohol from Albert the grog runner and Elizabeth was worried for the children’s safety. If I don’t get my fat arse out of bed, they might fall and that would be awful.

Esther pulls back the blanket and slowly gets up. The room spins for a while, her head feels like it’s going to explode, her mouth is dry, the sweat under her arms dripping. She steadies herself on the edge of the dresser until her head clears and then heads towards the kitchen.

Later in the morning, Esther is feeling a little better. She found some kangaroo meat to eat and had some tea so her heart isn’t racing quite so badly and she is no longer sweating. She needs to get to the clinic. Maybe one of those lazy home care workers could pick me up, she thinks. They pick up Doris when she needs a ride to the clinic. Why not me, I need a ride. “You’re not on our list,” they’ll say. How do you get on the bloody list, anyway? Helps if you’re a friend of a relative, I suppose. She looks out the window, the sun is bright and the air looks still and hot, no wind. She will walk to the clinic even though it will mean she’ll be late for her appointment again. So sue me, she thinks – who cares other than you if I’m late or on time?

Esther’s surprised by what she sees at the clinic this morning. There is a big sign over the receptionist’s desk saying the Homelands Health Centre exists to serve the people of Port Good Hope so they can achieve physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing as individuals, families and community. Humph, that’s a new idea. They are going to serve me? Seems to me with all of these appointments they set up for my diabetes that I’m serving them with my blood!

Another surprise, that counsellor I’ve been trying to get my son to see is here in the waiting room just visiting. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him outside of his office in the two years he’s been in Port Good Hope. I wonder what’s going on.

Marie asks me if my phone number has changed lately. I don’t remember her ever asking me that before. I do have a new number. My daughter Bella thought I should cancel my home telephone when I took over the contract on her mobile phone. I tell Marie the new number and turn to go sit in the waiting room. “Esther?” she calls, “would you like a cuppa while you’re waiting?” Wow, they really are going to serve me.

Arlene is the nurse’s name. She says we’ve met before but I can’t remember them all. Arlene is quite excited today. She says the staff are working on three new programs that are being created to work in each individual community. Diabetes, addictions, and home care are the three, Arlene says. “We’re meeting with everyone in Port Good Hope that has high blood sugars or diabetes,” she explains. “We want to know from each person what is the most important aspect of their health – mental, physical or spiritual health. Which is most important to you, Esther?”

I don’t know what’s she’s talking about – health? I don’t know if I’ve ever really thought about my health. They told me I was diabetic when I was pregnant with my second child. I had another four after that, all huge babies that looked so odd in the nursery they have at the hospital for babies who aren’t doing so well when they’re first born. What’s my goal for health? How do I even begin to think about that? I would like to say to her, I want enough money that I don’t have to worry every month if I can pay my bills. I would like to tell Arlene that I’d like someone to take my son out on the land so he can feel the peace and know he is worthy. I’d like someone to help me look after Marla. She’s driving me crazy with all of her demands. I know she’s lonely and scared. Hell, I’m scared.

“I don’t know what I want,” I tell the enthusiastic nurse. I’m so tired. “My kids aren’t doing well,” I say. “They are always at me to rescue them. How can I rescue them when I can’t even take care of myself?”

“Tell me about your kids, Esther” she says.

An hour later I emerge from the nurse’s office with red eyes and a list of ideas. Arlene and I have made a list of options for my kids and for me. As I stood up to leave, Arlene says to me “Is there anything else I can help you with today?” I want to know what they’re putting in the tea around here – the staff seem to really care.

“No,” I say, “I really appreciate you listening to my story, I can’t remember the last time someone just listened to me.” She promises to meet me at my mother’s house on Friday so we can talk to her about some options too.  Junior is just getting up when I get back to the house. He doesn’t look good. Doesn’t smell very good either. “I think there’s enough water for a shower,” I say to him. He looks at me with eyes that are barely open and heads for the shower.

I call my mother. “Marla,” I say. “The nurses at the clinic are looking at how they can improve home care, they want to talk to you”.

“I don’t get no home care, I’m not on the list,” she says.

“I told her that and I told her you weren’t doing so well all alone. She says they are going out and meeting all the Elders and talking about options. I told her we could meet at your house on Friday.” I wait for her to process this message. She will be pleased to have someone visit but she won’t say so.

“What do they want to talk to me about?” she grumbles.

“Options,” I say. “It’s the new word they are using with everyone. They say they want to talk to you about what options you might like. I don’t know what they’re talking about. I know you wanted to know how you get them to give you a ride sometimes. I also know you would like to play bingo again. Maybe those are some of the options.”

“When on Friday?” she says with more interest.

“Eleven,” I reply.

Junior emerges from the bathroom smelling like soap, a big improvement over the smell he went in with. His eyes are a little clearer. I boil water for tea. “The nurse at the clinic says they are starting a men on the land program,” I tell him.

“Nurses don’t know nothing about the land,” he says. “I don’t need any nurses hounding me in town or out on the land”.

“It’s for young men with addictions. Charlie is working with the counsellor to set it up,” I say. “I think you should think about it.” He gives me a dark look and heads for the bedroom, slamming the door behind him. I pour the water for the tea and think about Charlie.

Charlie had a worse time at the Mish than me or any of my brothers or sisters. Charlie seemed determined to bury himself with grog. He’s been through more treatment programs than you could count. It looks like once he figured out how to manage his drinking back here in Port Good Hope he was ok. If he’s part of a program for young men here in town, I think Junior would do well to give it a try. Junior really missed out on having a strong man to look up to. The older boys had my dad before he passed. Junior only had his deadbeat drunk dad to follow around and drag him home when he passed out.

“How can I help you today, Esther?” Kindness again, what’s up with these people? I’m back at the clinic today. This time I’m seeing the social worker for the first time. My kids won’t have anything to do with her because she’s the one that takes your kids if you’re caught drinking. Normally you have to go see her at the other building – no one likes to go there because they think you have to be crazy or a drunk to see anyone there. Arlene told me the social worker would see me anywhere I wanted her to – my house, the clinic or the wellness centre. I figured the clinic wouldn’t stir up any talk. I’m always going to the clinic for my diabetes.

“The nurse says you might be able to help me with the bills I can’t pay,” I say. I didn’t believe Arlene when she said the social worker might be able to help. I know they’ve helped Elders with forms to fill in but I’ve never heard of them working with people who have bad debts.

“Well, let’s start with looking at the money you have coming and the money you have going out every month,” she says. I’ve brought some of my bills and cheque stubs so she can help me figure out what I might be able to do to get out from this mess I’m in. Arlene surprised me when she said that sorting out my bills so I didn’t have to worry about running out of electricity or getting evicted from housing was a good start on a goal for my health.

“Marla, why are you still in bed?” I say. The nurse, counsellor and home support worker are in the living room. I think my mother is doing this on purpose. “Get up, we have people here,” I say to her in Kriol.

“Magdalene, we’re here to learn how things are going for you. We have a few questions and then we hope you will ask us lots of questions. My name is Arlene, I’m one of the nurses at the clinic. I share my job with a nurse named Claudia. You may have met her, she has an Adelaide accent. This is George, he’s a mental health counsellor and you probably know Monette, the home support worker.”

My mother nods and sits in her favourite chair. I bring her some tea with lots of sugar, just the way she likes it. Arlene says they’ve been going around interviewing all the Elders in the community and anyone else who will need some help at home, to keep them safe and well in their own homes. My mother is one of the last ones they are interviewing. With all the information they’ve collected they will be looking at the programs and services that people think they need and then make some decisions.

It’s not just the health centre staff that will be making the decisions. There’s going to be a committee made up of three people from the community and three from health and social services. I won’t hold my breath. I’ve seen many committees try and do things differently for the people.

What I like from the interview with my mum was the counsellor speaking up about ideas he has to help Elders deal with abuse. Elder abuse is a big problem in Port Good Hope. Everyone knows when the pensions come into their accounts and then all of a sudden the children and grandchildren come for a visit. My son Elwood is bad for this. Marla wants him to come for a visit but not just to humbug her for money. She depends on him to get the roo skin she needs to make her beaded vests. She can’t say no to him but she can’t get through the month any better than I can if she gives him any money.

Some of the ideas the committee is thinking about is a day program for Elders at the wellness centre. Hot lunch and bingo with fruit and vegetables for prizes is the idea they are thinking about. Marla perked up at that idea. Marla asked how many times a week they would play bingo.

The clinic people also said they might get out of transportation support all together. The clinic staff plans to be making more visits to people’s homes so there won’t be as much need to bring Elders to the clinic. It takes up too much time of the home support workers and it’s too hard to provide it to everyone. The clinic is partnering with the land council office to see if this is a service the council could take over.

No one has asked me about my blood sugar all week. I know it’s down from where it usually is. I can feel it. The social worker gave me some ideas of how I can pay my bills and Junior has an appointment with Charlie and the counsellor to see about the men out on the land program.

If Marla goes to bingo even twice a week it will mean two days that she’s not calling me complaining about her back or her shoulders or whatever other body part is aching. I finally feel like maybe I could think about my health now. What would my goal be? I’d like to be able to paddle a canoe again. Maybe I could even teach my grandsons.

Graduate supply and public hospital funding – when will Government get this the right way around?

BY DR RODERICK McRAE, CHAIR, AMA COUNCIL OF PUBLIC HOSPITAL DOCTORS

As I write, Victorian salaried doctors are voting on its recommended Enterprise Bargaining Agreement, and other jurisdictions are in advanced negotiations in the new industrial relations frameworks. Relevant reports will follow. 

My attendance at the sobering March 3 AMA Workforce and Training Summit convened in Melbourne, together with inspection of AMA’s 2018 Public Hospital Report Card, explains my continued exasperation at the consistent failure of Government to introduce realistic, necessary policy responses that deal with the now clearly apparent multiple medical training pipeline obstacles and poor public hospital access. Currently we have too much medical graduate supply and insufficient funding for appropriately training our junior colleagues in a manner that will meaningfully lead to reasonable public access to public hospital services. 

The Summit attitude was constructive with about 80 national stakeholders combining to produce many broadly supported actions which AMA can prosecute.  The Summit’s challenge was to consider what measures are needed further ‘downstream’ in training provision to ensure sufficient high quality training places in all medical specialties as they are needed for community benefit. While I fear the problems we now face are actually fast becoming too entrenched to solve, the Summit made it apparent that the medical profession is looking to the AMA, and within it your Council of Public Hospitals Doctors (CPHD), to lead the case for major reform.  Accordingly, CPHD will be guided by the outcome strategies of the Summit, and will press to further inform and influence our health policy makers. 

Two certain consensus points emerged from the Summit: stop opening new medical schools, and start rationalising resources towards regions and specialties where they are most needed. Government has regularly failed to fully listen to AMA’s advance warnings that there is real structural constraint to training capacity and that substantial ongoing investment is necessary to maintain training standards. Additionally, we need to urgently find sustainable, equitable paths to tackle the maldistribution of doctors (particularly across rural settings) and the shortages or bottlenecks arising in some craft areas. 

I observe that it was AMA advocacy that achieved for most medical school graduates (and including many International Medical Graduates) guaranteed internship after graduation when, incredibly, Government had not actually originally factored this in to its expansion decision. Just another Federal/State divide. And, let’s not forget, the massive increase of new graduates doesn’t actually have true tsunami characteristics of quick destruction by ingress then receding as fast as it came, enabling an early, planned, rebuild. Instead, there is actually a permanent rising of the water table, overwhelming teaching infrastructure capacity, which means patients in public hospital beds. 

The point is, we are graduating medical students in numbers far in excess of the OECD average without ensuring the adequate provision of the essential training places, both prevocational and specialist. This is at the same time that Commonwealth funding investment is not keeping pace with population growth.  Any economist would reel. 

In my December 2017 Australian Medicine piece, I discussed the ‘doing more with less’ implications of the Commonwealth financially penalising public hospitals who report acquired conditions, sentinel events and avoidable readmissions, otherwise known as possible healthcare outcomes (as if we are exercising choice to not provide optimum care now!). Added to that is the idea of penalising ‘low value care’ based on what are imposed and unsophisticated definitions, all with the aim of minimising financing, and a country mile from favourable health outcomes. This Commonwealth approach is in conjunction with them not offering any additional long term hospital funding via its 2020 State Agreement. 

So, we have no additional funding despite AMA’s 2018 Public Hospital Report Card establishing there has been a 3.3 percent year-on-year average increase in separations (that’s called increased productivity), that one third of urgent emergency department patients are not seen within the recommended 30 minutes and that most States’ urgent elective surgery is not performed within the 90 day clinically indicated timeframe (that’s called increased demand). Don’t get me started on the sometimes years of a patient waiting to be seen in outpatients before actually being counted on an elective waiting list! And they want to claw back already insufficient funding when a complication happens. That economic management is called madness. If only health care really was like slapping a motor vehicle together on a production line; but it just is not. 

The Summit’s Report will help us work together to develop initiatives to build a sustainable, well-trained, well-qualified and accessible medical workforce. The AMA’s Report Card is true evidence-based advocacy about hospital performance and the need for Government funding support to improve public access. Both suggest the public health climate is ominous with Government offering less funding but at the same time pressing for improved outcomes and offering more graduates but with no clear, coordinated, training pipeline management. Government must listen to us because of the implications for the community’s fair access to appropriate public hospital services, and for the career aspirations of our best and brightest. 

[Comment] Transparency of retracting and replacing articles

Journal editors are responsible for the integrity of the published record and must correct it when necessary. They are getting better at this job, as evidenced by journal retraction policies1 and numbers of article retractions.2 Most retractions are due to misconduct, but about 20% are retracted because of an unintentional error or methodological flaw.2 To credit the correction of an honest error and avoid stigmatisation of authors, journals have begun a practice of retraction with republication of a corrected article.