Victorian Statutory Duty of Candour

RACS responded to "A statutory duty of candour" consultation paper stating that much of what is proposed in this set of legislative reforms is already adequately covered by current open disclosure requirements and multiple professional codes of conducts across the medical professions. Acknowledging that the recommendation for this change arose from significant organisational failures the focus of this legislation should be on improving transparency and disclosure requirements at the senior organisational level. If this legislative reform is progressed it is imperative that there is a clear distinction between an apology for an adverse outcome and an admission of guilt.
News, media releases & advocacyNov 28, 2017

Although the Consultation Paper acknowledges that a statutory duty of candour is not meant to encourage the practice of defensive medicine or lead to an increase in litigation both are a significant risk of these proposed reforms. If this legislation is ambiguous in stating that an apology is not an admission of guilt it could have significant negative impacts on the medical profession through increases in the cost of insurance premiums and changes in practice behaviour and scope whereby doctors are less willing to treat certain types of patients.

There must be absolute clarity in any legislation that an apology from an individual for an adverse outcome does not indicate any fault in medico-legal terms. Without this any legislation of this type will not be acceptable to surgeons, or other registered doctors.

Read the complete response at the link below.

RACS response to A statutory duty of candour consultation paper