Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 882913,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/882913/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 153,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Seme, ODM",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. (Dr.) James Nyikal",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 434,
        "legal_name": "James Nyikal",
        "slug": "james-nyikal"
    },
    "content": "person who was doing the procedure, she actually undertook the procedure and obviously there was a major problem that occurred that had to be corrected later. We went back to the people who trained her and we found information that during her training under Dr. Ilako, she actually had a similar problem of not adhering to instructions. Actually, at one time, she enucleated two eyes of a patient when it was not clear whether the eyes were to be enucleated or not. She did that without referral to the consultants. On her own volition, she said she realised that her competence as an ophthalmic surgeon was wanting and, therefore, she tended to keep herself just to general ophthalmology. The Committee, therefore, felt that it would not be fair to expose the Kenyan people to a doctor who, on her own volition said, “I do not feel competent.” She even agreed that given a chance, she would do the required two years of training so that she gets the specialist status as required by law. So, our recommendation that the board cancels her recognition immediately solves that problem, but there are many issues that we realised existed. Why was it that at the first time, the board felt that she should be registered? What appeared to us is that the clinic that she owns and manage seems to be a good clinic. Therefore, as a Committee, we decided to be very clear on the distinction between the institution and the professional. To that extent, we still felt she could not be allowed to practise. As to whether she can run that clinic, we just recommended that the board should go and look at the details of that clinic, but anybody can actually run a medical institution so long as they ensure that there are qualified staff and correct equipment. So, that was not the issue unless the board goes back to look at more details of the clinic. The other issue that came to our attention is that in this clinic, there are doctors from abroad. It did appear that since they come from abroad, the person who is actually now responsible for them… We felt that it would not be very fair to have doctors who come in for sessions, although that is allowed by law, and then go back. In their absence, when they have gone back to their country, who then takes responsibility? I think that is the matter that the board will then have to look at. We also know that some patients get referred out of this country. Many referrals are actually not conducted on a doctor to doctor basis. There are many times that patients search around where to go. We have taken up that issue with the ministry and it is looking at a way of streamlining that. So, all in all, I support this Report and its recommendation that the board should go ahead and cancel the registration. It should then look at all the other issues that are in the remaining four recommendations. Hon. Speaker, I second."
}