Australian state border restrictions

[DC3]

I'm surprised they are able to refuse to treat a patient. I thought the hippocratic oath prevented that sort of decision.

So, what are the consequences of breaking the hippocratic oath?

 

[nutwood]

So, what are the consequences of breaking the hippocratic oath? None?

I genuinely don't know, although I'm quite sure there's contributors here who do. My observations have been that doctors can avoid tasks without having to outright refuse to treat a patient. Usually they can hide behind business decisions. If someone turns up at their normal doctor and that doctor refuses to treat them because of their vaccination status...?

 

[RooFlyer]

Then there was the rural doctor's practice in Ouse in Tasmania that had to close 2 months ago because the doctor(s) refused to be vaccinated and the health services mandate came in . Took the pharmac_ with them. I think it was the doctors ... Reports didn't say specifically but hinted strongly at it.

Fortunately another practice took it over. @drron can you add anything; it was a pretty bizarre thing?

 

[Must...Fly!]

I'm surprised they are able to refuse to treat a patient. I thought the hippocratic oath prevented that sort of decision.

Personally if a practitioner decides that they don't want to choose a patient that is up to them. One might understand why a 70 year old GP might not wish to treat an unvaccinated patient in person.

Emergency care is a different story though.

 

[Quickstatus]

Wouldn't have a clue as to where the pathology labs are !

Google or click here

Queensland doonas

Why do Queensland need Doonas?

hippocratic oath

What is that?.
Can a Dr refuse to see or treat a patient. Yes and no.
See here

 

[DC3]

I’m not so sure that the Hippocratic oath is compulsory these days. I understand that there are other versions/‘promises’ in some countries/cultures/insitutions.

 

[DC3]

... Why do Queensland need Doonas? …

Not sure. But I understand that in Canberra some primarily use them for hiding under.

Edit: Equivalent to the ostrich with it’s head in the sand.

 

[nutwood]

Interesting feedback. It's not something I've really kept up on but forty years ago, the thought was become a vet or a dentist because you get the same money, but can choose your clients.

 

[nutwood]

Not sure. But I understand that in Canberra some primarily use them for hiding under.

Edit: Equivalent to the ostrich with it’s head in the sand.

This references back to an on-going problem. Historically the correct place to hide was under the bed but with so many reds under the bed, this became unviable. Logically, the next place was under the mattress but for most mainstream politicians, there's so much cash jammed in there, the only really comfortable and safe place is under the doona.

 

[Quickstatus]

choose your clients.

The easiest way to choose your clients is to make yourself expensive. But it does not make your clients any better.

Off topic though…

 

[drron]

So, what are the consequences of breaking the hippocratic oath?

Absolutely nothing. But the idea that all doctors take the oath is wrong. At my graduation nearly 51 years ago I along with all the others did not take that oath. If you read the oath you will realise it really doesn't relate well to modern day practice.

"I swear by Apollo the physician, and Asclepius, and Hygieia and Panacea and all the gods and goddesses as my witnesses, that, according to my ability and judgement, I will keep this Oath and this contract:

To hold him who taught me this art equally dear to me as my parents, to be a partner in life with him, and to fulfill his needs when required; to look upon his offspring as equals to my own siblings, and to teach them this art, if they shall wish to learn it, without fee or contract; and that by the set rules, lectures, and every other mode of instruction, I will impart a knowledge of the art to my own sons, and those of my teachers, and to students bound by this contract and having sworn this Oath to the law of medicine, but to no others.

I will use those dietary regimens which will benefit my patients according to my greatest ability and judgement, and I will do no harm or injustice to them.

I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.

In purity and according to divine law will I carry out my life and my art.

I will not use the knife, even upon those suffering from stones, but I will leave this to those who are trained in this craft.

Into whatever homes I go, I will enter them for the benefit of the sick, avoiding any voluntary act of impropriety or corruption, including the seduction of women or men, whether they are free men or slaves.

Whatever I see or hear in the lives of my patients, whether in connection with my professional practice or not, which ought not to be spoken of outside, I will keep secret, as considering all such things to be private.

So long as I maintain this Oath faithfully and without corruption, may it be granted to me to partake of life fully and the practice of my art, gaining the respect of all men for all time. However, should I transgress this Oath and violate it, may the opposite be my fate."

Translated by Michael North, National Library of Medicine, 2002.

However many of us pay respect to our teachers by continuing to guide our younger colleagues - in the modern parlance paying it forward.

 

[nutwood]

Absolutely nothing. But the idea that all doctors take the oath is wrong. At my graduation nearly 51 years ago I along with all the others did not take that oath. If you read the oath you will realise it really doesn't relate well to modern day practice.



However many of us pay respect to our teachers by continuing to guide our younger colleagues - in the modern parlance paying it forward.

Doesn't seem unreasonable. I'd be quite happy for my doctor to follow such strictures

 

[Pushka]

So on the day that Marshall threatens to close the state border again, after opening it last week and promising never to shut it again, his FB has just updated with a picture of a granny meeting her grandchild for the first time with a letter thanking Mr Marshall. Tone deaf.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Doesn't seem unreasonable. I'd be quite happy for my doctor to follow such strictures

The Hippocratic Oath was replaced decades ago by the Declaration of Geneva. The majority of medical schools in Australia use that or their own version of it.

 

[burmans]

I’m not so sure that the Hippocratic oath is compulsory these days. I understand that there are other versions/‘promises’ in some countries/cultures/insitutions.

None of the medical schools in Australia actually use the Hypocratic Oath any more. From memory when my daughter graduated it was the Declaration of Geneva.

 

[MARTINE]

None of the medical schools in Australia actually use the Hypocratic Oath any more. From memory when my daughter graduated it was the Declaration of Geneva.

Yep - I’m as old as Hippocrates - and when I graduated it was not used….

 

[Pushka]

Yep - I’m as old as Hippocrates - and when I graduated it was not used….

Maybe you graduated before it was even created then?

 

[MARTINE]

Maybe you graduated before it was even created then?

 

[Kangol]

The community is moving on I think. Certainly a lot more calling for calm and taking on those who love their doonas too much. You know the ones, they are guaranteed their income and don't have family interstate. No skin in the game. I just keep calling them the Doctors union and Doctors aren't the flavour of the month in SA because so many of them are refusing to treat unvaccinated patients, something I find abhorrent.

The issue, that most people don't realise, is not that they refuse to treat non double jabbed people, they refuse to treat people who do not voluntarily release one part of their medical record (AIR) that the doctor has no entitlement to access. There's a lot of federal government protection about this data - part of which the RACGP lobbied for.

Lay terms: they demand people "show me your papers" and discriminate based on that. Without going into detail, think about how you'd communicate the demand/"request" to a German speaking person.

It's no different to the (current) Novak Djokovic situation.

 

[Pushka]

The issue, that most people don't realise, is not that they refuse to treat non double jabbed people, they refuse to treat people who do not voluntarily release one part of their medical record (AIR) that the doctor has no entitlement to access. There's a lot of federal government protection about this data - part of which the RACGP lobbied for.

Lay terms: they demand people "show me your papers" and discriminate based on that. Without going into detail, think about how you'd communicate the demand/"request" to a German speaking person.

It's no different to the (current) Novak Djokovic situation.

Indeed. I just checked the text we received and it does state "need to show proof" of vaccination. The presumption from patients being that if you can't or won't then no consult.