Canberra Health Services has taken umbrage with a report in this newspaper of allegations vaginal examinations have been carried out on mothers without their consent at the Centenary Hospital for Women and Children.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The charge goes to the heart of a patient's right to privacy and dignity and the hospital's duty of care.
CHS, in a statement which quotes recently appointed CEO, Bernadette McDonald, said the allegations were "misleading and unfair" and are likely to cause "unnecessary concerns in the community about public maternity services".
CHS dismissed the allegations as "unsubstantiated" and described them as an "unfair attack". These are remarkable responses given the circumstances in which the allegations were made.
They are part of a submission, written by a CHS midwife, to the ongoing "Inquiry into Maternity Services in the ACT" being conducted by the Legislative Assembly's Standing Committee on Health, Ageing and Community Services.
The committee is due to begin public hearings by the middle of the year.
It is astounding, given the claims came to light as part of a parliamentary oversight process, that CHS is so willing to pre-empt the committee's findings.
The same midwife alleged there was a toxic hierarchy and a political environment in the birthing space and that the hospital was struggling to cope with a shortage of midwives.
This newspaper has a long history of fairly and accurately reporting on problems within CHS and is no stranger to attempts by ACT bureaucrats and politicians to "shoot the messenger".
Monday's article was not an attack on the hospital by The Canberra Times and should not be viewed as such.
It was a fair report of a public document that had been submitted to a parliamentary committee of inquiry. By responding in the way it has, Canberra Health Services has left itself open to suggestions it is trying to deter staff from raising issues through the committee process.
We are told "there are processes in place" for staff to raise any concerns about clinical service delivery. These include emailing the CEO or joining her for lunch in the cafeteria.
The sub-optimal performance of CHS's processes is well known and has been remarked upon in the past.
This is why the ACT government agreed last year to calls for an independent inquiry into an alleged culture of bullying and intimidation within ACT Public Health Services.
That inquiry, which released its final report on March 7, received 400 submissions from individuals and organisations.
It found 61 per cent of respondents had witnessed bullying over the previous 12 months and that 35 per cent had been bullied themselves with most incidents being "staff on staff".
According to the report: "The information gathered from submissions, individual and group interviews and the staff survey reveal a worrying and pervasive poor culture across the ACT Public Health System".
Under these circumstances one would think CHS would be receptive to internal criticism. To act in a way that seems calculated to deter people from speaking out sends a very peculiar message at this time.
