The Catholic Weekly 26 April 2020

catholicweekly.com.au 11 26, April, 2020 ‘Catholic clarity for complex times’ Listen to our Podcast every Thursday Ordinary Catholics having a relaxed, informal and searching conversation To subscribe go to https://www.thiscatholiclife.com.au HIGHLIGHTS Episode 38: The Feminine Genius Episode 37: Catholic Tradies Episode 36: That’s History the Tribunal that Dr Kok was facing any complaint or pros- ecution under either of these laws. In fact, the Tribunal heard evidence that seemed to con- tradict a negative characterisa- tion of Dr Kok. The Tribunal said that there has never been a clinical com- plaint against Dr Kok in his 15 years of practice. It said that there was no evidence before it that Dr Kok compromises the best interest of his patients. It said there was no claim that Dr Kok has not endeavoured to protect and promote the health of individuals and the wider community. Even so, the Tribunal de- cided that the only way to pre- serve public confidence in the medical profession and ensure its standards aremaintained was to suspendDr Kok. An investigation that was conductedwithout inform- ing the accused, andwhich scoured back a decade to try to find evidence supporting the prosecution. A lack of transparency in terms of the complainant and the evidence against the ac- cused. An appeal body that is pos- sibly too heavily influenced by the culture wars. I feel like I’ve heard this story before in Vic- toria… One last point: this is the same Tribunal that in 2016 overturned the suspension of themedical registration of Vic- torian doctor Rodney Syme, who admitted to providing some 170 patients with a lethal dose of Nembutal (a drug used for assisted suicide) before the practice was legal in that state. Syme estimated that around 70 of those patients took the drug. We don’t know the content of Dr Kok’s Facebook posts, because the Tribunal will not release them (and it would probably even further jeop- ardise Kok’s career if he did so himself.) What we do know is that the Tribunal decided that Dr Kok’s Facebook posts on “culture war” issues weremuchmore dangerous than giving 170 people a lethal drug. Something seriously stinks in Victoria. MICHAEL COOK - P18 Animal Farm takes shape in Victoria C ardinal George Pell’s complete vindica- tion by a unanimous decision of the High ourt of Australia isn’t the only case raising concerns about the Victorian “justice” system at themoment. If the Cardinal’s case was one piece of evidence that the “culture wars” are an unspo- ken, condemnatory witness in cases against those who pro- fess a Christianworldview, the recent Victorian Civil and Ad- ministrative Tribunal decision in the case of Dr Jereth Kok is another. Dr Kok is a general practi- tioner, with a practice not far from the centre of Melbourne. He is also a Christian, who has not been shy about sharing his views on issues of life, gender, marriage and sexuality. InMarch 2018, an anony- mous personwhowas not a patient made a complaint to theMedical Board that a Face- book post Dr Kok hadwritten about the 2017 Flinders Street car attack was in bad taste. Without telling Kok, the Board began an investigation. More than a year later, inMay 2019, another anonymous person whowas not a patient of Kok’s complained to the Board of of- fensive posts. In August 2019, the Board advised Kok that it had al- readymet and decided to sus- pend him frompractice using its emergency powers.These emergency powers give the Board the ability to immediate- ly suspend a practitioner’s reg- istration if it believes doing so is in the public interest. While not intended to be ex- haustive, the example of when thismight be used provided in the law is if the practitioner is “chargedwith a serious crimi- nal offence,” so it is not a pow- er that is intended to be taken lightly. The Board gave Kok just two business days to provide a written response for a hear- ing that would occur the fol- lowing week.The Board had compiled his internet posting history over the preceding ten years, around 2000 pages in to- tal, and selected just 30 posts they thought justified the sus- pension of Kok’smedical reg- istration for reasons of “public interest.” It was not only the Board’s targeted investigation of the man and lack of due process that was afforded him that is of concern; it is also – and espe- cially – the decision of the Vic- torian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which denied Kok’s appeal. Without providing the de- tail of any of Dr Kok’s Facebook posts, the Tribunal described themas follows: “Some of the posts on a simple reading of them, argu- ably denigrate, demean and slur medical practitioners who provide termination of preg- nancies, recognise and treat gender dysphoria (in aman- ner that is in accordance with acceptedmedical practice) and recognise that people who identify as transgender are not suffering fromamental health condition. “Some of the posts, par- ticularly read in isolation, do appear to endorse or call for violence and/or genocide towards racial and religious groups and endorse calls for capital punishment for mem- bers of the profession who provide termination of preg- nancy services. Some of the posts do arguably express de- meaning views regarding LG- BQTI+ individuals.” While the allegations about inciting violence are quite se- rious, it is worth noting that doing so is a crime in Victoria, and there is a specific piece of legislation that prohibits be- haviour that incites or encour- ages hatred, serious contempt, revulsion or severe ridicule of a person or group of people on the basis of their race or reli- gion. It was not suggested by It would have seemed unbelievable 10 years ago. Now Victoria’s medical authorities are policing the views of medical practitioners, implementing secret investigations - and threatening suspension. South of the border, whether you’re a conscientious professional doctor matters less tomedical regulators than what your views are T o the point with Monica Doumit An investiga- tion conduct- ed without informing the accused [doctor], and which scoured back a dec- ade [trying] to find evidence supporting the prosecution.” Monica Doumit