Page 3378 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I felt that I was not able to withhold that information from the public and that, if I had, questions would then have been asked of me about why I withheld information from the public.
I think we have all learnt lessons from this matter and I again acknowledge the distress caused to the family. I have ensured that this process will not repeat itself again by confirming that in a matter like this, such as an H1N1 status being confirmed post mortem, it will be a matter for the coroner to speak about. We have advised the national incident room that in terms of reporting, which we are required to do under the pandemic planning, no further details other than the fact that a death has occurred will be provided. This is based on the small size of the ACT community and the fact that individuals can quite clearly be identified, possibly through a notice in the paper which links them to an H1N1 status. That is the position that we have taken. I hope that it gives the community the information they need, but offers the families of the loved one the security that they can grieve in private without public notification of their loved one’s death.
After the death of a patient in one of our public hospitals or health services, it is normal practice for the treating doctor and team to inform the family of any relevant positive test results. This would also include the provision of appropriate advice to immediate family members regarding any measure that they should take personally to protect themselves or any potential health risk arising from the circumstances of the individual’s death. That relates not just to the H1N1 virus.
If at any time during the course of treatment of any patient of any of our health services there are notifiable communicable diseases matters impacting on the wider community, the Health Protection Service is notified and can undertake broader public health action. In the case of a death associated with H1N1, after the treating doctor has informed the family of the test results, public health officers will contact the family with advice relating to close contacts. For specific or individual advice, this will be for the person to visit their GP or other specialist. Public health officers will provide just general information on H1N1.
I know that in the case we are discussing today, ACT Health has provided significant support to the family over the past two weeks, particularly around the concerns that the family has raised. This support included a senior doctor from the office of the Chief Health Officer liaising with family members, providing information about swine flu and discussing at length their concerns around their own health. ACT Health acknowledges and I acknowledge that information to assist the family could have been provided sooner, and again we apologise for any distress caused by this delay.
Every year, seasonal influenza is associated with many deaths throughout Australia. In fact, I did draw this point to the attention of the journalist from the Canberra Times. It is not routine practice for ACT Health to issue media statements or, in fact, provide any public comment about deaths that may occur in the hospital, whether it is related to flu or any other illness. Hundreds of people die in our hospitals every year and they are dealt with in accordance with established hospital protocol. But in relation to any communicable diseases, publicly available advice relating to simple infection control measures such as washing hands and advice to remain at home if someone has flu symptoms is considered sufficient. The government does recognise the high levels of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .