Unconventional practice, "innovative" interventions and the 'National Law'
| Field | Value | Language |
| dc.contributor.author | Stewart, Cameron | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kerridge, Ian | |
| dc.contributor.author | Waldby, Catherine | |
| dc.contributor.author | Lipworth, Wendy | |
| dc.contributor.author | Munsie, Megan | |
| dc.contributor.author | Lysaght, Tamra | |
| dc.contributor.author | Rudge, Christopher | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ghinea, Narcyz | |
| dc.contributor.author | Eckstein, Lisa | |
| dc.contributor.author | Neilsen, Jane | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kaldor, Jenny | |
| dc.contributor.author | Nicol, Dianne | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-10-17T01:11:20Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-10-17T01:11:20Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020 | en_AU |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2123/33170 | |
| dc.description.abstract | This column explores a recent health profession disciplinary case which throws light on the problems of unconventional interventions by medical practitioners under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act 2009 (Qld). The case involved “innovative” practices which were later found to have been scientifically unsupported, dangerous to patients and grounds for cancelling the health practitioner's registration. This column looks at common features of these kinds of cases in Australia and then examines recent attempts by the Medical Board of Australia to draft policy guidance around the use of unconventional practice in medicine. This column concludes with a number of changes to improve the effectiveness of the proposed policy. | en_AU |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_AU |
| dc.publisher | Thomson Reuters | en_AU |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Law and Medicine | en_AU |
| dc.rights | Copyright All Rights Reserved | en_AU |
| dc.subject | unconventional practice | en_AU |
| dc.subject | unsatisfactory professional practice | en_AU |
| dc.subject | professional misconduct | en_AU |
| dc.subject | innovation | en_AU |
| dc.subject | informed consent | en_AU |
| dc.title | Unconventional practice, "innovative" interventions and the 'National Law' | en_AU |
| dc.type | Article | en_AU |
| dc.subject.asrc | ANZSRC FoR code::48 LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES::4804 Law in context::480412 Medical and health law | en_AU |
| dc.type.pubtype | Publisher's version | en_AU |
| dc.relation.arc | LP150100739 | |
| dc.relation.arc | DP180101262 | |
| dc.rights.other | This article was published by Thomson Reuters in the Journal of Law and Medicine and should be cited as Stewart, C., Kerridge, I., Waldby, C., Lipworth, W., Munsie, M., Lysaght, T., Rudge, C., Ghinea, N., Eckstein, L., Neilsen, J., Kaldor, J., & Nicol, D. (2020). Unconventional practice, “innovative” interventions and the “National Law.” Journal of Law and Medicine, 27(3), 574–589. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.au | en_AU |
| usyd.faculty | SeS faculties schools::The University of Sydney Law School | en_AU |
| usyd.citation.volume | 27 | en_AU |
| usyd.citation.issue | 3 | en_AU |
| usyd.citation.spage | 574 | en_AU |
| usyd.citation.epage | 589 | en_AU |
| workflow.metadata.only | No | en_AU |
Associated file/s
Associated collections