The voluntary euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke has accused the Northern Territory branch of the Australian Medical Association of “insufferable arrogance and paternalism” because it refused to reinstate his membership after a supreme court decision overturned the suspension of his medical licence.
The president of the NT AMA, Professor Richard Parker, wrote to Nitschke last week to tell him his membership – withdrawn in February – would not be returned.
“Under Section 22(1), a member may appeal against their expulsion by giving notice to the secretary within 14 days after receipt of the council’s decision,” Parker wrote. “Council understands that no such appeal was received and, as such, your expulsion stands.”
In response, Nitschke released a statement accusing the AMA of ignoring the decision of the supreme court which overturned his deregistration, and of demonstrating “the insufferable arrogance and paternalism of the medical profession”.
“There are too many doctors who have little understanding, or little regard for the law, believing they can make the rules up as they go,” Nitschke said.
“Now Prof Parker is trying to hide behind an AMA bylaw that says I should have ‘appealed my suspension within 14 days’, and refuses to acknowledge the supreme court’s finding that exposed the errors in law made by the medical board.”
Earlier this month the supreme court overturned a decision by a Medical Board of Australia (MBA) review tribunal which had upheld the board’s decision to suspend Nitschke’s registration.
The MBA suspended Nitschke’s registration in an emergency meeting last year, following allegations the doctor had counselled 45-year-old Nigel Brayley to take his own life. Brayley was suffering depression but was otherwise healthy.
The lengthy tribunal hearing heard arguments from Nitschke that there was no doctor-patient relationship which obliged Nitschke to intervene further. It also explored Nitschke’s advocacy for “rational suicide”.
In his supreme court decision Justice Hiley found the board “misconstrued the code [of conduct]” in its deliberations and applied clauses without “the existence of any expert or other evidence which could possibly give that provision any content and relevance”.
The only issues for the tribunal to determine were whether Nitschke had breached the code of conduct, and if the tribunal “reasonably believes” Nitschke posed a serious risk, Hiley said.
The AMA revoked Nitschke’s membership of the NT branch after the tribunal had endorsed the MBA’s decision.
In March Parker told ABC radio Nitschke’s advocacy of “rational suicide” did not comply with the AMA’s code of ethics.
“The AMA expects very high standards from its members and my understanding is that the council, in reviewing Dr Nitschke, felt that he hadn’t ... actually achieved those very high standards,” Parker said.
Nitschke remains the subject of 12 other complaints lodged with the MBA.
Both the federal and Northern Territory branches of the AMA declined to comment.
