A case of correct behaviour by doctors

The report on the Ombudsman’s findings in the case of a “baby’s sudden death” (November 17) is, with due respect, very biased. As a senior doctor, I should have thought that the report should have at least mentioned the existence of a relevant, statutory body, the Medical Council Malta.

This body was purposely set up to deal with such matters, at some public cost, and the curious fact is that it was ignored both by the complainant and the Ombudsman. It would seem the Medical Council as it stands at present does not enjoy the recognition and the trust it deserves.

However, to return to the case in question, the Ombudsman raises a number of important issues which are both of general and medico legal interest.

Is the Ombudsman the right authority to judge whether an “attitude” on the part of a doctor or a nurse is, “right, caring and sensitive” enough to meet the situation at hand? Should he be the source of our guidance as to how we should deal with the inconsolable hurt a mother feels at the loss of her child to a cruel illness?

The chairman of the Paediatrics Department “soon after their son died, approached the parent to explain what happened”; this fact was confirmed by the magisterial inquiry.

This top rung therefore was certainly not keeping aloof. So which other person does the Ombudsman suggest was more competent and better informed to give the parents the information they desired?

An internal inquiry cannot be, by its very nature, independent and even-minded and one is at a loss to see that a former Chief Justice might think otherwise. He goes so far as to say that a magisterial inquiry should not “replace” an internal departmental inquiry.

In all humility I expected a jurist to declare the opposite, namely that the magisterial inquiry is the paramount inquiry, guided as it is by precise written rules of investigation under oath. Internal inquiries in my experience have been none other than instruments for cover-up.

Another important issue raised was the matter of access to medical information on the part of a patient and/or the immediate relatives. This right was never questioned. What is questioned is the alleged right to provide at request a copy of the medical dossier held in a public hospital. The Ombudsman, if he holds this view, should inform us under which law or regulation this so-called latter right is embodied.

In my long career as a doctor I have always striven to ensure and safeguard the good name of Maltese doctors and nurses by showing up serious mismanagement where it exists. In this case the doctors and nurses acted correctly and humanely.

The cruel reality is the devasatating nature of the illness that overwhelmed our baby patient and the irreparable sense of loss felt by the parents.