Latest news with #MedicalBoard
India Today
5 hours ago
- Health
- India Today
Bombay High Court allows abortion of 24-week pregnancy of 14-year-old rape survivor
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday permitted a 14-year-old girl from Maharashtra's Raigad to abort her pregnancy, if she so desires. The minor, a survivor of sexual assault by a man she had met on Instagram, was in the 24th week of case came to light when the girl's mother noticed that she had not menstruated for six months. A hospital visit confirmed the pregnancy, leading to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against the Manisha Jagtap, appearing for the minor who is currently admitted to a hospital in Raigad, submitted that the girl was unwilling and unable to carry the pregnancy to full term. Under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, a pregnancy may be terminated for up to 20 weeks without court approval. Since the girl had crossed this threshold, court permission was required for the procedure. On June 6, the High Court directed the Surgeon of the Civil Hospital, Alibaug, Raigad, to set up a Medical Board to assess the minor's condition. The court also asked the Board to evaluate her mental health. The Board later submitted its report stating the girl was anemic, and the termination procedure could only be carried out after correcting her hemoglobin the matter was heard again on Tuesday, the bench interacted with the Medical Board doctors, who confirmed that the minor was now fit to undergo the procedure. The doctors also assured the court that there were no foreseeable complications from the procedure that might affect the girl's ability to conceive in the future—an aspect that had concerned the these assurances, the High Court granted permission for the termination. Additionally, it directed the trial court handling the FIR under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to expedite the determination of interim compensation for the Watch
ABC News
7 hours ago
- Health
- ABC News
Doctor banned for sexual relationship and inadequate care provided to vulnerable patient
A "selfish, cruel and calculated" GP has been banned from practising for four years for having sex with a vulnerable, mentally-unwell patient who he also "dangerously" prescribed high-risk medication. South Australian doctor Indren Moodley's registration as a medical practitioner was suspended in late 2021 over allegations he "comprehensively breached the boundaries of the doctor-patient relationship". The Medical Board of Australia referred a complaint about the then-doctor on three grounds, alleging professional misconduct to the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which has cancelled his registration until February 2029. In its ruling, published this month but delivered in February, the tribunal found Mr Moodley preyed on the "serious and complex" vulnerabilities of the young adult female patient, who was more than two decades younger than him. "We are satisfied that the respondent used the position of trust he had developed with the patient to exploit those vulnerabilities and to manipulate her, essentially in a calculated campaign to groom her to satisfy his own needs," the tribunal found. The ruling noted the then-doctor obtained the patient's mobile phone number from her medical records three weeks after she first saw him, and they exchanged 909 text messages involving "inappropriate, personal, non-clinical and sexual" content over 12 days. The tribunal noted Mr Moodley had invited the patient to his home and offered her alcohol despite knowing she had recently attended an alcohol detox program. He also had sexual intercourse with her. "It is particularly egregious that, despite the respondent's knowledge of the patient's alcohol addiction and her recent discharge from hospital for alcohol detoxification, he supplied and encouraged the patient to drink wine on the occasion they had sexual intercourse," the tribunal found. It also noted the then-doctor's care of the patient was inadequate as he failed to take a detailed medical history, a mental health referral lacked necessary details and he prescribed "high-risk" benzodiazepines inappropriately, including while she was in hospital under the care of other medical practitioners. "The respondent took advantage of the patient's multiple vulnerabilities and abused the power imbalance between them for his personal sexual satisfaction," the tribunal's ruling states. "His conduct was seriously unethical, predatory and cruel. "As her treating practitioner, the respondent was well aware of her vulnerabilities." The ruling also published an excerpt of a statement from the patient, in which she said Mr Moodley's conduct had "a big impact" on her, including causing sleeping problems and a distrust of men. "I am absolutely hurt and feel used and manipulated by a person who knew my physical and mental illnesses," she said in the statement. The tribunal noted no complaints had been previously made about Mr Moodley, but there was a "limit to the positive weight we can place on this given our findings as to the selfish, cruel and calculated campaign the respondent engaged in to satisfy his needs to the patient's serious detriment". It also noted he had admitted the grounds of complaint made against him and had shown insight and remorse. In the ruling, the tribunal said a "strong sanction" against Mr Moodley was necessary to protect the public, and acknowledged he had struggled with his mental health, professional and personal embarrassment and unemployment since his suspension in 2021. The tribunal reprimanded the doctor, cancelled his registration and banned him from providing any health service or applying for registration for four years from the date of the ruling on February 10, 2025. He was also banned from using the title "doctor" or "Dr" while unregistered.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California Assembly Advances Bill to Expose Patients to Doctor Substance Abuse, Says Consumer Watchdog
SACRAMENTO, Calif., May 28, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- A bill that will put patients at risk from doctors who continue practicing while abusing drugs or alcohol passed off the floor of the California State Assembly yesterday and moves on to the Senate. AB 408 by Assemblymember Berman and sponsored by the Medical Board of California, would create a secret drug and alcohol "diversion program" where the Board would send doctors who have substance abuse problems, instead of taking disciplinary action. AB 408 does not require disclosure to Medical Board enforcement staff, or consequences, for a doctor in the program that fails a drug test, skips a drug test, or otherwise violates the program. This silence about relapse by doctors who are actively treating patients is not limited to doctors who choose treatment voluntarily, as proponents claim. It applies to doctors sent to the program by the Board who would otherwise have faced discipline, including those found using substances at work, said Consumer Watchdog. "With AB 408 Assemblymembers and the Medical Board prioritize doctors' interests over keeping their patients safe. The bill would eliminate the Medical Board's responsibility to investigate and act if it refers a doctor to treatment and that doctor fails a drug test. That means patients will be harmed by doctors who relapse, just as they were in the last program that was shut down for putting patients at risk," said Consumer Watchdog executive director Carmen Balber. The Medical Board's prior diversion program was abolished after failing five state audits because doctors who entered the program could relapse with no consequences and patients were harmed. To prevent this from happening again, the Legislature passed oversight rules called the "Uniform Standards" and applied them to doctors in diversion programs. AB 408 exempts doctors from the law, eliminating oversight and accountability from the program. Consumer Watchdog has urged preserving those patient protections. Tina Minasian, an advocate for patient rights in California, suffers lifelong injuries inflicted by a substance-abusing surgeon who was a participant in the former confidential physician diversion program. She played a pivotal role in advocating for the closure of the prior failed Diversion Program, and enacting the Uniform Standards so any future program would better protect patients. "I can't believe that eighteen years later I have to take on this fight again on behalf of all Californians," stated Minasian. "We gained too many protections in the past fifteen years to give them up. I lost everything when I was harmed and cannot allow another Californian to endure what I did." The bill would allow doctors to seek treatment to avoid discipline even if they were impaired on the job. For example: A San Francisco doctor suspected of stealing drugs from her hospital was recently arrested after she was found passed out in an operating room shortly after she was scheduled to participate in a toddler's surgery. Under AB 408 the Board could send that doctor into diversion instead of the disciplinary investigation, treatment oversight and consequences for relapse that are all mandatory under current law. The bill does not require reporting of a positive drug test to the Board, so the doctor could continue treating patients while keeping diversion program violations secret and place patients in harm's way. Read Consumer Watchdog's opposition letters on AB 408 here and here. The History of the Medical Board and Physician Diversion The former confidential physician diversion program was subjected to a critical sunset review in 2007 after five failed audits by the state and a critical report from an Enforcement Monitor revealed significant failures in drug testing and oversight. In response, patients stepped forward to share their harrowing stories of harm and loss due to the negligence of doctors in the program. The Medical Board of California recognized the severity of these revelations and terminated the program in 2008. That same year, a pivotal hearing on the diversion program was convened at the state Capitol. The chair of the joint committee announced SB 1441, legislation designed to establish Uniform Standards for Substance-Abusing Health Care Professionals in California. Passed into law in 2008, SB 1441 was a vital step toward rectifying the failures of the previous diversion program. It empowered the Medical Board with essential tools to monitor substance-abusing licensees and enforce meaningful consequences for offending physicians, prioritizing the protection of patients and fostering a culture of accountability among healthcare providers. In 2016, SB 1177 was enacted, which allowed the Medical Board of California to recreate a new physician diversion program that adhered to the Uniform Standards. AB 408 discards those consumer protections and reconfigures any future program in the image of the failed diversion program. View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Consumer Watchdog Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Hans India
21-05-2025
- General
- Hans India
TG raises incentive award for marriage of disabled persons
Hyderabad: The incentives for marriage between a disabled person and a normal person has been increased from Rs 50,000 to Rs 1,00,000. According to a Government Order issued by the Department of Women, Children, Disabled and Senior Citizens, the incentive for marriage between a disabled person and a non-disabled person has been increased from Rs 50,000 to Rs 1,00,000. The incentives will be issued in the name of the wife. As per officials, the criteria includes at least one of the applicants must have a valid disability certificate from the Medical Board. The applicant should be a Telangana resident. The marriage should be properly registered under the applicable marriage laws. The degree of disability should ideally be 40 per cent or more, although the government order may specify additional details. The application must be made within a year of marriage.
Hindustan Times
21-05-2025
- Hindustan Times
Delhi court sets aside order to lodge FIR against cop, doctor in custodial torture case
A Delhi court on Tuesday set aside prosecution proceedings against a Delhi Police Inspector and a resident doctor of a government hospital in a case of alleged custodial torture of an undertrial and the subsequent cover-up. Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Kiran Gupta of Patiala House Court passed a nine-page order on Tuesday, setting aside a Magistrate's order in April, which directed lodging of an FIR against Inspector Sumit Kumar, posted with the IGI Airport Police Station, and Dr. Aman Gehlot, a resident doctor with the Indira Gandhi Hospital here in the city. The order read, 'The Magistrate without considering the enquiry report and report from the Medical Board as ordered by him, passed the order for lodging of FIR against the petitioner, considering the submissions made by R-2 (accused) as gospel truth. The analysing the age and nature of the injuries has ordered registration of FIR'. The matter related to one Nishit Patel, who was arrested by the Delhi Police on April 4 from Kathmandu, Nepal, on charges of forging his passport to travel to Portugal and the United Kingdom. The next day, Patel was produced before the magistrate's court, where he alleged that he had been physically tortured in police custody. Earlier, the Magistrate, in an order passed on April 8, observed that the Inspector was involved in allegedly causing injuries to the accused while he was in custody and the doctor, who prepared the Medico-Legal Report (MLC), willfully ignored the injuries sustained by him and prepared a false report. The court had ordered an FIR against both the persons within 24 hours and also directed a probe in the involvement of other officials. The Inspector had subsequently moved a revision plea before the Sessions court on which the present order was passed. ASJ Kiran Gupta observed that no offence was made out against the Inspector as neither the CCTV footage showed the officer assaulting the accused nor the accused said that he was beaten by the Inspector while in custody. The court further noted that as per the accused's own statement to police, the injuries sustained by him were from a scuffle with a person two days before his arrest. The judge also observed that while the medical report did not clarify the age of the injuries sustained by the accused, the latter refused to be medically examined before a board of doctors from AIIMS. An AIIMS report filed by jail authorities confirmed the injuries sustained by Patel on his foot, arms and shoulders. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Pranav Joshi had noted that this was in contrast with the MLC conducted earlier which showed no injuries to Patel and was simply 'an eyewash'. The court had observed, '...not only have the police officials abused the authority vested in them by law, they have also committed a cognisable offence. The judge ordered the FIR to be lodged against the inspector and the doctor under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections 117 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt), 119 (voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt to extort property, or constrain to an illegal to an act) and 126 (wrongful restraint). The court added Section 256 of BNS (public servant framing incorrect record or writing) against Gehlot, and directed the Delhi Medical Council to conduct a separate inquiry against him.
