Submission to Australia’s COVID Inquiry

With a simple recommendation: go back to upholding long-standing principles of medical ethics. It’s not rocket science.

This submission focusses on mandatory vaccination, informed consent, and concerns about the undermining of Australia’s democratic principles.

Mandatory vaccines

It is wrong to promote the vaccines as safe effective and necessary when they were unsafe ineffective  - see here, and here.

It is wrong to coerce people into taking a vaccine, in particular a vaccine for which there is limited safety data, which is inevitably the case for a vaccine which has been given provisional approval.

It is wrong to coerce people into taking a vaccine for fear of losing their job or ability to participate in society. This is in beach of long-established and still ostensibly upheld principles of medical ethics.

Where mandates are imposed, It is wrong for government-related bodies  (ATAGI, AHPRA, and the Medical boards) to dictate the circumstances in which a vaccine exemption can be granted. They do not have the expertise nor is it their role to insert themselves in the doctor patient relationship. The very notion of an exemption is an affront to medical ethics, given that medical treatments are not supposed to be compulsory across the board. If we can genuinely freely choose whether we take a particular treatment, the notion of an exemption is irrelevant- we can simply choose not to have it!

It is wrong to pretend that there were no mandates and that the principle of informed consent is still operating in Australia. Doctors continue to be punished for upholding this principle.

It is wrong to suspend doctors for expressing a view which is different to the government’s public health policy, even where the doctor’s view is based on sound scientific evidence, as set out in AHPRA and the Medical Boards’ 9 March 2021 Joint Statement (note the word OR in the 4th line):

“Any promotion of anti-vaccination statements or health advice which contradicts the best available scientific evidence or seeks to actively undermine the national immunisation campaign (including via social media) is not supported by National Boards and may be in breach of the codes of conduct and subject to investigation and possible regulatory action.”

The Medical Code of Ethics includes these obligations:

• 4.3.3 Informing patients of the nature of, and need for, all aspects of their clinical management, including examination and investigations, and giving them adequate opportunity to question or refuse intervention and treatment.

• 4.3.4 Discussing with patients their condition and the available management options, including their potential benefit and harm and material risks.

It is wrong to put doctors in the position where they face disciplinary action for discharging their duty to explain risks and benefits to patients, so that the patient can give their fully informed and voluntary consent.

It is wrong to exclude and demonise people who choose not to have a vaccine.

Adverse events

It is wrong to ignore safety signals from pharmacovigilance systems in Australia and overseas.

It is wrong to leave significant increases in excess deaths unexplained.

Access to other medical treatments

It is wrong to withhold medical treatment such as organ transplants from people who are unvaccinated.

It is wrong to prevent doctors from using tried and true medications such as ivermectin.

It is wrong to have little or no medical advice available to people who suffer an adverse reaction to a vaccine.

Public debate, respect and the rule of law

It is wrong to censor public discourse and to vilify those who have a different view.

It is wrong to suspend the rule of law for long periods of time and to hand extensive power to health officials and health ministers.

National Cabinet’s terms of reference elevates a committee of senior ministers to decision-makers and gives State and Territory governments a subservient implementation role. This gives disproportionate executive power to an extra-constitutional body which was conjured out of thin air, by demoting the state and territory governments to implementing bodies rather than the primary decision-makers. The Australian constitution gives the States, not the Commonwealth, power over health. The States should reclaim the primacy of their role in health matters.

The Australian parliamentary website includes this description of the “five key values of democracy” in Australia:

• Respect for individuals and their right to make their own choices.

• Tolerance of differences and opposing ideas.

• Equity—valuing all people and supporting them to reach their full potential.

• Each person has freedom of speech, association, movement and freedom of belief.

• Justice—treating everyone fairly, in society and in court.

The Australian government should have upheld these principles, and our health care rights, in its responses to the COVID-19 crisis. The inquiry should assess the government’s response to COVID-19 against these principles.

Elizabeth Klein

An Australian legal practitioner within the meaning of the Legal Profession Uniform Law (Victoria).

15 December 2023