Protect “Good Medical Practice” in Australia: safeguard the Medical Board Code of Conduct.

Completely unacceptable that medical opinion should be compromised by cultural factors and leaves the medical profession at risk of lawsuits when patient care is not as it should be due to external constraints not based on medical knowledge.

The current proposals are dangerous in the extreme. They are comparable to telling police officers that they may only arrest people who agree that they should be arrested or telling judges that they must only pass judgements approved by the person they are sentencing. What sense is there in training doctors if they are to ignore taking action they know they should take on the basis of " cult" or "cultural" non-medical practices?

Gender is not a cultural belief. A patient who does not have scientific and medical qualifications can not advise a doctor, who is qualified and knowledgeable in the area of human biology, that the doctor is incorrect and that they are not looking at a biological male or female. A doctor cannot be expected to accept gender ideology in direct opposition to their scientific studies and proven facts.

These proposed changes are a sad reflection on emotion over substance, mistaking care with concern and dictating freedom of thought and conscience for doctors. A sad reflection on the dictatorial desires of the board rather than allowing doctors to assess, judge and discuss based on the evidence before them and what is in the overall best interest of the patient.

Respect for a person and their medical best interests - taken to mean longevity and health - may potentially be made mutually exclusive by the claim of overriding cultural beliefs, as implied in Section 4.8 of the draft Good Medical Practice. This is unnecessary, and raises subjective claims and opinions (interpretations of culture) and potentially transitory allegiances to such (i.e. lifestyle choice or self- identification) above the practice of valuing the continued physical then psychological well-being of the patient as the paramount concern of the medical practitioner. This practice was established for good reason, ensuring a consistency of approach in treatment for all, without prejudice or bias. This beleif in itself is cultural, as note 4.8 implies, and this longstanding culture among medical practitioners, if a medical practitioner who gives allegiance to this culture should be used, should have the final say on all decisions - otherwise the proposal's intended aim of cultural respect for others requires a self- defeating negation of the practitioner's own core cultural beleifs, both to their own psychological harm and the tangible harm of the patient. Democracy is a culture, as are all representative bodies, etc. And all are challenged in their application, even legitimacy, by other cultures in our environment. So what determines the prominence of one culture in a given area over another? My hope is its track record, imperfect though it may be, shows overall it has provided better outcomes than in states where demonstrable self-interest, and alternative cultures of physical health, have prevailed. Women, the very young, the elderly, and those disagreeing with the majority view are exploited, disparaged or denied care in numerous cultures today. A culture of care (or non-care) may be established by the proposed changes in clause 4.8 that actively and tangibly harms patients beyond the cultural feelings and beleifs of relatives. Especially if the patien

The proposed changes would be dangerous to good medical practice

These regulations are a disgrace to the profession. Medical science is unequivocal about sexual identity: one is ether male or female and it is encoded into every cell of one's body!

These changes would force a doctor to do cultural genital mutilation if requested by the family. Do we really want to force the issue?

Doctors should be the ones to determine what is medical beneficial for a patient, not the patient of their family. If you don't like what one doctor is recommending, go find another doctor!

The doctors signed up to save lives and inform their patients about what would endanger them and help them heal, let's enable them to do it.

Would mental patients be allowed to determine their own treatment? Would drug addicts be able to dictate their own prescription? Would an anorexic be able to tell the doctor to remove food?

White is white and black is black in colours we know it's not grey. Dr's know what is medically correct and should not be swayed by "feelings" and be allowed to make proper medical decisions

I disagree and can you please let the doctors be free than to close their mouth.

I disagree and can you please let the doctors be free than to close their mouth.

Please drop the proposed changes as it endanger our doctor’s ability to judge and treat patients based on scientific and medical knowledge. And their basic right to practice with freedom of conscience and without fear of being deregistered because of their beliefs should not be taken away from them. I believe the proposed changes is harmful to the doctors, to the patients and to the society they serve.

I disagree and can you please let the doctors be free than to close their mouth.

Doctors must be allowed to honestly and frankly discuss all aspects of a patient’s condition and circumstances with the patient and their family. Doctors should not be forced to practice a procedure they personally don’t believe is benificial or best practice for that patient.

Once again eroding standards so that when the state wants act in very unethical ways there are no laws to prevent them doing so.

Doctors should be permitted to speak out on medical matters which they consider do not conform with good medical practice.

This is scary: culture changes and is subject to generational philosophical trends: biology and good science must be allowed to prevail in medicine. Consider what 'culture' at varous times and places has prioritised: the elongating of women's necks in one part of Africa; FGM; foot binding. Modern Western medical practice, no matter what the critics may say, has delivered us from culturally-led superstitious and oppressive practices. Introducing this 'culturally-appropriate' clause will undo protective and healing ethical practices and make us subject to potentially devastating works of humans selfishness. Please do not accept any change to the rights of doctors to practice according to their conscience and according to good medicine.