[ad_1]
“(…) By the way, the leadership of the Higher Council of Forensic Medicine presented in public the conclusions of the medical-legal report carried out in the context of the ongoing investigation, without respecting the right of the two doctors to object to the legality of the conclusions of the medical report and publicly revealing a 99% guilt rate, seriously violating the right of the accused doctors to a fair trial, not respecting the principle of the presumption of innocence, as long as the case is not closed and the indictment has been transferred to the court, and making an unacceptable decision condemning the doctors who were investigated in public, violating the norms of professional deontology and prejudging the file,” the Romanian College of Doctors said in a statement.
According to the Academy, the release of the High Committee of Forensic Medicine clearly states that according to the “Medical Malpractice and Medical Liability. European Guidelines on Determination Methods and Evaluation Criteria”, which represents good practice guidelines at European level, experts from Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia and France collaborated in the evaluation of medical malpractice, “the role of forensic medicine is becoming increasingly specific, important and inevitable in the judicial context to prevent and avoid erroneous interpretations and hasty scientific conclusions”.
“However, the Romanian Society of Physicians pointed out through communications that the leadership of the Higher Council of Legal Medicine violated this guideline of good practice when a “hasty verdict” was made in a public space. In addition, the CMR pointed out the omission of a mandatory step in the referenced guidelines (page 549), the so-called “Step 2″, which clearly recommends that forensic doctors consult one or more experts before issuing any conclusions, even preliminary ones”, the cited source said.
Following the medical opinion issued by anesthesia and intensive care doctors from Romania and other European countries and the Romanian Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, which calls for a reanalysis of the reasonable suspicion of guilt of premeditated murder, the Romanian Doctors Association expressed “concern” about the “disproportionate” nature of the detention measure, arguing that there are other measures that could eliminate any dangerous state for public order, while calling for all existing legal instruments that the judges have found useful to avoid public condemnation and the publication of conclusions before the completion of the legal process.
The Romanian Academy of Physicians also reaffirmed its commitment to promote and support the creation of a modern legislative framework adapted to the needs of doctors and patients, which reflects international standards, indicating that it launched a series of public debates on the topic of medical malpractice at the national level between 2022 and 2023, held by the Romanian Academy and the university centers in Bucharest, Iaşi, Targu Mures, Cluj-Napoca, Timisoara and Craiova, with the participation of doctors, lawyers and representatives of patients’ associations. The main conclusion of this approach is that new regulations are needed in this field.
“At the same time, there are problems in the specific legislation regulating forensic activities, and there are deficiencies in the way forensic services carry out their activities at the state level, namely the identification of unreasonable delays in legal proceedings, with significant consequences for society as a whole, which are publicly acknowledged, objectively documented and can be attributed to medical-legal institutions, but in no case to the Romanian College of Doctors”, the statement noted.
The Romanian College of Physicians considers that, in accordance with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, which is binding on the judiciary and courts of national law, and in the context of a subject of public interest, such as the situation in the emergency clinical hospital “Sfântul Pantelimon”, all authorities with competence in the medical and legal fields are obliged to cooperate in proving the judicial truth, strictly complying with their competences and procedures issued, but as a basis, medical-scientific evidence.
Two female doctors at Pantelimon Hospital have been pre-arrested and are accused by prosecutors of intentionally reducing the dose of norepinephrine, which plays a role in maintaining blood pressure, leading to the death of a patient in the intensive care unit.
[ad_2]
Source link
