Login
Review into cosmetic surgery industry ‘won’t improve patient safety enough’
The review into cosmetic surgery and patient safety conducted by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) and the Medical Board of Australia has been condemned by the Australian Lawyers Alliance (ALA) and Shine Lawyers’ medical law practice leader.
Jess Feyder
The recommendations follow on from proposed legislated reform that is set to lift the ban on the use of testimonials in advertisements for health services last week.
“The ALA is concerned that there is nothing in the report that will improve patient safety quickly enough,” said Ngaire Watson, barrister and spokesperson for the ALA.
“Many of the recommendations will be useful but they rely on the regulator stepping up enormously, as well as taking swift and strong action even when the spotlight is not on them,” she said.
The ALA is particularly concerned that the report does not contain a clear directive to the Queensland Parliament to ensure that proposed changes to the National Law regarding the use of testimonials do not proceed through the host jurisdiction (Queensland) and then onto the other states and the territories.
“The lack of timelines in both the final report and in Ahpra and the Medical Board’s response is problematic. Patients and practitioners need clarity, and clear timelines will also act as another measure of holding the regulator to account for the implementation of these necessary reforms.
“We hope Ahpra’s acceptance of the recommendations reflects the regulator’s position on the use of testimonials in cosmetic surgery advertising moving forward, but we still need a clear recommendation that the National Law should not be changed,” said Ms Watson.
“Without legislative backing to keep the ban on testimonials, it will be too easy for false and misleading testimonials to end up in the marketplace.”
“Regrettably, the medical regulator has missed opportunities to protect patients from rogue cosmetic surgeons,” said Daniel Opare from Shine Lawyers in Victoria.
“If a patient is going under the knife, their practitioner should have completed surgical training accredited by the Australian Medical Council.
“I have seen firsthand the devastating impact botched cosmetic procedures can have on people both aesthetically and psychologically.
“While the Brown review recommends an enforcement unit within Ahpra, I am yet to be convinced of the regulator’s capacity to investigate malpractice in this area.
“After all, it was the work of tenacious journalists — not the regulator — that sparked this inquiry,” noted Mr Opare.
The ALA welcomes the recommendation that proactive auditing of cosmetic surgery advertising is undertaken.
“The ALA has long called for Ahpra to take a proactive approach to monitoring compliance with its own advertising guidelines, without the need for a member of the public or another practitioner to first complain.
“We look forward to seeing this recommendation implemented swiftly,” said Ms Watson.
The ALA also welcomes the recommended legal scrutiny of section 133(1)(e) of the National Law in relation to cosmetic surgery and the extent to which it may effectively prohibit forms of advertising of cosmetic surgery.
“This analysis must be done in order to ensure the legislation is being understood and enforced properly by practitioners, regulators, policymakers and the general public.
“Despite what the final report recommends, the ALA believes that this legal advice should be made public,” said Ms Watson.
