Australian Medical Association says proposed bill undermines ‘role of the medical board and the ethical codes of the wider medical profession’

This article is more than 7 months old

This article is more than 7 months old

The religious discrimination bill would harm patients’ rights to access healthcare and allow religious hospitals to discriminate against doctors, the Australian Medical Association has warned.

The AMA made the comments in a submission to the second round of consultation on the religious freedom bills, which closes on Friday.

The second draft bill, released in early December, has addressed some conservative religious institutions’ concerns by including an exemption that will enshrine their ability to discriminate against staff on the basis of religion in settings like hospitals and aged care.

But the broad chorus of dissent against the bill from employers, LGBTI organisations, human rights groups and medical bodies shows little sign of abating.

Religious discrimination bill: what will Australians be allowed to say and do if it passes? Read more

The AMA submitted that sections of the bill “appear to override … the well-developed framework of professional standards of the medical profession” and “create a new confusing element with the potential for serious unintended consequences”.

The bill allows doctors, pharmacists and other limited categories of medical practitioners to “conscientiously object to providing a health service”, sparking concerns about provision of contraceptives and other services.

The second draft made only minor changes to the provision, narrowing the range of medical practitioners who can conscientiously object and specifying that this does not give a right to medical practitioners to discriminate against individuals based on gender or other characteristics.

The AMA noted the medical board’s code of conduct stated doctors have “a duty to make the care of patients their first concern”.

It submitted that the bill “would create a conflict between professional standards and commonwealth legislation where relevant sections of the code of conduct are simply displaced by the legislation, effectively undermining the role of the medical board and the ethical codes of the wider medical profession”.

The AMA gave practical examples of impacts including: harm when patients need “specific care at the time it is sought”, for example abortion or post-exposure prophylaxis; logistical difficulties in seeking alternative care; mental health impacts and patients foregoing medical care for fear of judgment.

The AMA warned the bill would “[undermine] the rights of some doctors by enabling employers to discriminate against them based on religious belief”.

It noted a doctor could be refused employment, promotion or career development opportunities or have their employment terminated “because they act on their clinical/vocational responsibility to provide a health service to a patient” where their views clashed with those of the hospital or aged care facility.

The bill would legalise all statements of religious belief, provided they are not malicious and do not harass people, even if they otherwise breach federal, state or territory discrimination laws.

The AMA submitted the bill therefore “lawfully enables statements (asserted to be based on religious belief) to offend, humiliate, insult or intimidate groups such as women, LGBTIQ people or persons with disabilities”.

On Thursday Labor leader Anthony Albanese held a consultation on the bills with peak bodies including the Australian Industry Group, AMA, unions, human rights, women’s and LGBTI groups. It follows a similar consultation with religious leaders in December.

Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) Leadership is about listening to people. Thanks to these advocates and civil society leaders for meeting with me and my team to talk about their concerns with the Government’s proposed religious discrimination laws. pic.twitter.com/nEtiUPUbKV

Albanese told the Labor caucus in November that “we support freedom of religion but we don’t support increasing discrimination in other areas” and the shadow health minister Chris Bowen has described the bill as “friendless” – both strong signs the opposition is unlikely to support it.

'This bill is friendless': Chris Bowen signals Labor could vote against religious freedom bill Read more

Anna Brown, the chief executive of Equality Australia, said it was “very pleasing” Albanese had listened to the concerns of a “large and diverse group of stakeholders”.

Rodney Croome, a spokesman from Equality Tasmania, told Guardian Australia that while Albanese did not commit to oppose the bill he did “hear the best arguments against it from some of Australia’s most influential advocates”.

“If, before the meeting, he held out any hope this bill is redeemable he won’t any more,” Croome said.