It is public news, that the attempted suicide of French surgeon Dr. Richard Emery instigated a Senate inquiry into medical complaint process. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-04/dr-charlie-teo-backs-call-for-medical-complaints-inquiry/6751402
Martin Fletcher, the CEO of AHPRA defined his version of vexatious complaints, in the Senate Inquiry.
‘By ‘vexatious’ I mean complaints motivated by rivalry, commerce or emotion rather than genuine concerns for patient safety.’
‘What I am saying is that in all of the available data and research evidence that we have looked at there does not appear to be a big problem with vexatious complaints, and by ‘vexatious’ I mean a harmful intent on the part of the person making the complaint and no patient safety concern emerging when we look at the issue. If I can just give you an example’
‘In terms of numbers. If I can give you one example, we have a research partnership with the University of Melbourne. They looked at 850 mandatory notifications over a 12-month period. They found fewer than six that they believed potentially met the criteria for a vexatious notification. The point I am also making is that, even though the numbers are small, we recognise that the impact on the individuals involved can be significant.’
‘I can give you a couple of examples to give you just the flavour. One, for example, related to a couple who were both medical practitioners, who had been married and who were divorcing. There was an issue about the future of the practice in the context of their divorce. Another one related to two health practitioners who were in a relationship with the same other health practitioner, and notifications were made in the context of that. So it is typically those sorts of issues around questions of commerce, emotion and rivalry in what we would term harmful intent with no patient safety concerns emerging as a result of a notification.’
‘A truly vexatious complaint is a complaint that is groundless and made with the intent of causing distress or harm to the subject of the complaint,’ Assoc Prof Bismark explains. …’
[…]
‘While vexatious reports are frequently talked about, Assoc Prof Bismark maintains there is very little hard evidence about how often they occur. The best available evidence suggests that truly vexatious complaints are very rare, and that under-reporting of well-founded concerns is likely a far greater problem.’
In that inquiry, NHPOPC’s mere wonderment, about what could be the incidence of vexatious complaints, gained the status of ‘?evidence’ for reasons best known to the Senate committee.
Senate committee also misrepresented NHPOPC to have made investigated findings of vexatious complaints, and to have found such illusory findings to support Martin Fletcher’s evidence.
President Scott Ryan had been informed of the intentional misrepresentation. He responded arguing that he can’t do anything about it because he is the President, and therefore, too high up in the parliament’s bureaucratic ladder, to even do anything about it. Does not suit his Presidential status.
NSW Health Minister Brad Hazzard went on to write blatant lies to Australian Health Reform Association that it was Senate Committee, and not Martin Fletcher who researched the “truly vexatious.”
Brad Hazzard responding to Australian Health Reform Association:
‘The Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee into medical complaints process in Australia indicated that truly vexatious complaints are very rare, and that under-reporting of well-founded concerns is likely a far greater problem.’
Office of The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court of United Nations registered a complaint of torture and crimes against humanity against health regulators, on the basis that the autocratic NSW health minister and Senator Rachel Siewert’s committee misrepresent whatever they can, to end any serious matter including suicide, hook or by crook, in the favour of Martin Fletcher. And the President Scot Ryan could not be bothered.
Dr Yen-Yung Yap was aware of everything what was going on. He supported a public campaign protesting that, and even commented on that.
https://www.change.org/p/australian-prime-minister-to-err-is-human?source_location=topic_page
Dr Yen Yung Yap believed that he was a victim of a malicious and misleading vexatious complaint, and an equally malicious and misleading sham peer review organized by the health regulators, that had caused significant harm to him and his family.
But he had no idea how could all that be proven in court. He expressed his doubt in whatapp group chat on 29 August 2020.
Dr Yung Yap told me over the phone. His reputation means everything to him. He was very distraught that people in power had ganged up on him mafia style, to destroy his reputation.
Upon being informed of the response from the Office, on the night of 31 August 2020, the very talented and the very popular Dr Yen Yung Yap, committed suicide immediately, leaving behind a note to his dear wife, explaining why, as though to motivate the Office to open an investigation.
I have informed the Office of the recent tragic development, urging them not to let his sacrifice go in vain.
In summary, Senate opened a Senate Inquiry just because a French surgeon only attempted suicide. But the manner in which the Senate committee conducted the inquiry, with such contemptible and ridiculous misrepresentation, so as to be able to end the inquiry, hook or by crook, in favour of Martin Fletcher, eventually led to the procurement of a complete suicide of an equally talented, very popular doctor-surgeon.
Ofcourse regulators will argue in defend their reputation. That they were only trying to protect the public. That the complaint appeared legitimate concern. Blame Dr Yen-Yung Yap for lacking resilience.
But how would Senator Rachel Siewert, Chair of the inquiring committee, and NSW Health Minister Brad Hazzard explain such shameless, blatant fatal lies that eventually led to procurement of suicide of Dr Yen Yung Yap?
Regards,
Submitter 132
Senate Inquiry into medical complaints process