Page 3676 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 9 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES (CONFIDENTIALITY)
(AMENDMENT) BILL 1992
MR MOORE (10.33): I present the Epidemiological Studies (Confidentiality) (Amendment) Bill 1992.
Title read by Clerk.
MR MOORE: I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
Madam Speaker, I presented the Epidemiological Studies (Confidentiality) Bill at the beginning of this year and the Assembly was gracious enough to support it. It has come to my attention that there is some doubt about one small section of that Act, as to whether it will achieve its goal. To make sure that there is absolutely no doubt, I have prepared this amendment. That is exactly what it achieves. I think the Bill is self-evident, and I hope that members will be prepared to support it.
Debate (on motion by Mr Berry) adjourned.
HIV NOTIFICATION (LIABILITY OF MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS)
BILL 1992
MRS CARNELL (10.35): I present the HIV Notification (Liability of Medical Practitioners) Bill 1992.
Title read by Clerk.
MRS CARNELL: I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
The legislation I introduce today has been recommended by the legal working party of the Intergovernmental Committee on AIDS. This legislation is to allow for professional indemnity for doctors in cases where they elect to notify a partner of a person who is HIV positive. The same protection also applies if the doctor elects to notify the Medical Officer of Health using full name and address under certain circumstances. The legislation will give them legal protection for breach of confidence or breach of the right of privacy, again under certain strict conditions. But - and this is a big but - the legislation does not allow doctors to go off notifying third parties willy-nilly. Before doctors can gain the indemnity provided under this legislation, certain conditions must be fulfilled.
These conditions are as follows: Firstly, the doctor must be the one with whom the patient has had professional contact. Secondly, the doctor must have counselled the patient about the effects of HIV and its transmission to other people. Thirdly, the doctor has to have reasonable grounds for believing that the patient may transmit, or has transmitted, the disease to another person. Fourthly, the doctor must have reasonable grounds for believing that the patient has failed to notify his or her partner. Finally, the doctor must give the infected patient an opportunity to tell the partner at risk of contracting the virus, himself or herself. In particular, this means waiting a specified period of time of not less than 21 days. If the period of time specified by the doctor expires and the doctor
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .