For many weeks now, news have been circulating about a Filipino doctor who lost his licence because of certain minor medical procedures being performed inside a clinic. It was alleged that the report to the Medical Board of Australia was made by a fellow doctor. Both doctors are known to this writer so their names will not be mentioned to protect their privacy.
The news starts with another allegation that one doctor became the victim of a pyramid scam. It resulted in the sale of his clinic to another Filipino doctor who allowed him to continue practicing medicine within the premises which he no longer owned.
Then it came to the attention of the new owner that the former had been performing circumcision inside the clinic. Apparently, he felt obligated to make a report to the medical authorities.
The aging doctor suffered a heart attack when he learned that he has been divested of his medical licence. He was reported to have been confined at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Westmead but is now home in an undisclosed location. Having no other means to survive, the doctor was reportedly granted accommodations by the Housing Commission.
I’m saddened by the fact that it took a Filipino doctor to end the career of another Filipino doctor. With regard to circumcision, I know that it is a normal “rite of passage” for a male in the Philippines to undergo circumcision at puberty. My questions are these: How is it that a practicing GP can lose his licence here in New South Wales for performing a relatively inocuous procedure like circumcision? Did the doctor not have the required authority? What did the whistleblower doctor stand to gain by informing on him (or stand to lose by not doing so)? Where does Situational ethics stand on an issue like this?