Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 26 May 2004
32 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Health and Children the action he has taken or plans to take arising from public concern regarding persons paying very substantial sums of money to a doctor claiming to provide alternative treatment for cancer patients; if the next of kin of patients have met officials of his Department; the outcome of the meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15738/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Medical Council is the statutory body established to provide for the registration and control of persons engaged in the practice of medicine under the Medical Practitioners Act 1978. To engage in medical practice, a doctor should be registered with the Medical Council. Investigations by the Medical Council and the Irish Medicines Board into the activities of a registered doctor who had been offering medicines and services to cancer patients resulted in that doctor's erasure from the General Register of Medical Practitioners and a successful prosecution by the Irish Medicines Board. The same doctor has been suspended by the Medical Council on foot of a High Court order since July 2003. The individual to whom the Deputy's question refers was not on the register of the Medical Council.
My Department is carrying out a comprehensive review of the Medical Practitioners Act 1978. I intend to put before Cabinet soon the heads of a Bill for an amendment to the 1978 Act, which are at an advanced stage. Some of the main issues which have been considered are: greater public interest representation on the Medical Council; measures to improve the public accountability and transparency of the council; improved efficiencies in the fitness to practise procedures, and measures to ensure the ongoing competence of all doctors to engage in their profession. An increased public advisory role for the council on its area of expertise is envisaged.
The amendments will also include: a new definition of "medical practitioner" which defines the activities of a medical practitioner and also defines that he or she must meet the criteria for enrolment on the register. There will be provision for the council, which is in part relevant to this situation, on its own initiative or on the advice of the Minister, or any member of the public, to investigate instances or reports of individuals falsely claiming to be medical practitioners or providing services proper only to registered medical practitioners. It will be an offence, with appropriate penalties, for a person to sign a certificate or prescription which should only be signed by a registered medical practitioner. There will be provision for an offence, with appropriate penalties, for a person to take any title implying that he or she is a registered medical practitioner or to perform any action proper only to a registered medical practitioner. The Medical Council will be able to investigate cases of individuals who are not registered with the council providing services proper only to registered medical practitioners.
Persons who avail of services, whether medical, alternative or otherwise, should endeavour to seek the services of reputable institutions. For significant procedures in respect of serious illnesses, such as cancer, persons would be strongly advised to check that the services are provided by, or under the direction of, a registered medical practitioner and that such a doctor is in good standing with the Medical Council in this country. The advice of the patient's GP or other clinician responsible for that person's medical care should be sought in advance of commencing alternative or complementary therapy.
While the proposed amendments to the Medical Practitioners Act will relate to conventional medical practitioners, it must be acknowledged that the public will continue to use the services of alternative and complementary practitioners and alternative and complementary remedies. Alternative and complementary practitioners are not regulated in Ireland and I have taken steps, with which the remainder of this reply deals, to move towards a regulatory framework for alternative practitioners.
A meeting had been arranged for Friday, 21 May between officials of my Department and certain relatives of patients of the doctor in question, but this was cancelled at the request of those due to attend. I have been informed a meeting has been arranged for tomorrow, Thursday, 27 May.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
As a first step towards strengthening the regulatory environment for complementary therapists, I convened a forum in June 2001 to examine and explore practical issues involved in establishing appropriate regulation. Arising from the work of the forum I asked the Institute of Public Administration to prepare a report on proposals for the way forward, taking into consideration the formal views of the representative groups that participated in the forum.
The report, which was launched in November 2002, delivers on action 106 of the health strategy, Quality and Fairness — A Health System For You, and makes several recommendations on proposals for the way forward including the establishment of a working group to examine and consider regulatory issues; the continuation and development of a consultation process; and support for individual therapies in developing or strengthening their systems of self-regulation. As recommended in the report, I established a national working group to advise me on future measures for the regulation of complementary therapists. The working group held its first meeting in May 2003, is continuing to meet regularly and is expected to report within the next 12 months.
I welcome the fact that a meeting will be held. Does the Minister not accept that this is an extremely serious matter involving one doctor who was struck off the Irish register and another who was struck off the register in America for gross negligence, both of whom appear to have been practising quack medicine and taking large sums of money — between €10,000 and €20,000 — from people who are extremely sick and vulnerable, and that this extended over a considerable time and appears to be continuing in regard to one individual.
To date, only the planning law has been used in this case. Has the Garda Síochána proceeded with its inquiries? Is the Minister not ashamed that he is further delaying the amendment to the Medical Practitioners Act, publication of which was promised for 2005? We have waited over seven years for this Act, for which the medical practitioners have called, yet the Minister is unable to say when it will be published because he has taken off on his venture of supposedly reforming the health service while leaving the nuts and bolts legislation aside.
What will he do to regulate alternative procedures and medicine? He has not stated whether legislation will be introduced to deal with alternative practice. It has been sought by people in that area. We have not seen the health care professionals Bill but I presume it is not included in that so where exactly will that area of activity be regulated so that people can be protected, at a time when they are vulnerable, from unscrupulous people who are willing to take their money and not provide the care and treatment they need.
I take the recent events particularly seriously and the behaviour that transpired was unacceptable. The Medical Council took action in respect of one individual.
The first complaint was in 1992.
May I please continue my reply? I did not interrupt the Deputy. That individual was taken off the register. The council had no authority over the second individual because he was not on the register.
That is the point.
My officials have done substantive work on a new medical council Bill. They have consulted widely and have taken submissions. The heads of the Bill are almost ready, they have gone through every other Department and are now in the Attorney General's office and will be cleared within a week.
When will it be published?
The heads will be published very quickly, perhaps by the end of the next month, if not sooner. I caution against offering a panacea and pretending to people that a new medical practitioners Bill will suddenly eliminate this kind of practice and behaviour because it will not. There are limits to what we can do by regulation. It will strengthen certain aspects of it and perhaps give additional capacity to the Medical Council, but people visit various individuals seeking the ultimate solution to a very difficult and traumatic problem for themselves and their families, particularly when dealing with end stage terminal cancer or other terminal illnesses, and certain people come forward and offer solutions to that. People have travelled abroad for those kinds of services too.
We need to educate the public about the existence of the Medical Council, the idea of a register and so forth. I am the first Minister to move in this area, in conjunction with those involved in the field. There is a very wide continuum of alternative and complementary therapies available, all at varying stages of development. I outlined in my reply the up-to-date position on that. I convened a forum in June 2001 to examine and employ practical steps on the regulation of alternative and complementary therapists. I asked the Institute of Public Administration to prepare a report on proposals which it launched in November 2002. I established a national working group under Terry Garvey to advise me on future measures in the regulation and the group hopes to complete its work within the next 12 months. This is a wide continuum of somewhat complex people, some are pro-regulation, some are cautious about regulation and some have well developed self-regulatory mechanisms in place which will help us when we get to a regulatory framework, but I intend to bring forward proposals for the regulation of the alternative field.
