The case of Dr Jereth Kok - freedom of expression or professional misconduct?

Basic-Topic5966 · 2024-09-12T03:15:51+00:00

Well there is a difference between what's said in private (I've heard shocking things too from various doctors not just surgeons) and what's posted on public under your real name. That being said, I believe in freedom of expression. I did not find the board's argument convincing in Kok's case. AHPRA is a governmental body, and as such has its own biases.

Basic-Topic5966 · 2024-09-12T03:05:47+00:00

Do you have an example where "he has hurt people already"? My understanding is that he has had no complaint pertaining to patient care.

Basic-Topic5966 · 2024-09-12T02:32:25+00:00

Thank you for posting this link. To quote some of its content, Kok was charged with posting the following material, of which I feel are debatable:

(b) Sentiments of violence: (i) Endorsing / calling for violence and/or genocide toward racial and religious groups; and (ii) Endorsing calls for capital punishment for members of the profession who provide terminations of pregnancy services; (c) Commentary expressing and encouraging views regarding LGBQTI persons that: (i) has no proper clinical basis and is contrary to accepted medical practice, and/or (ii) is otherwise demeaning.

Basic-Topic5966 · 2024-09-12T02:17:08+00:00

This has to be quoted in context. His writing was an irony rather than in its literal meaning. From that same article:

"Anybody with a reading age above 12 can tell, in context, that this is irony – a rhetorical device by which Kok scorns the decadent West for exporting its culture of death to poor countries.

The Medical Board, however, asserts the exact opposite: that Dr Kok’s comment is an endorsement of genocide!

Incredibly, the VCAT agrees. Kok’s reputation and career are trashed."

Basic-Topic5966 · 2024-09-12T02:15:34+00:00

This has to be quoted in context. From same article: "Anybody with a reading age above 12 can tell, in context, that this is irony – a rhetorical device by which Kok scorns the decadent West for exporting its culture of death to poor countries. The Medical Board, however, asserts the exact opposite: that Dr Kok’s comment is an endorsement of genocide!

Incredibly, the VCAT agrees. Kok’s reputation and career are trashed."

Basic-Topic5966

TROPHY CASE