Last Thursday (Mar 17), the Ministry of Health (MOH) published a 800-word, 11 para-press release to update the public on its follow-up actions following the Hepatitis C Outbreak at the Singapore General Hospital (SGH).

Some background:

25 people were infected and seven deaths were possibly caused by the Hep C outbreak. The Independent Review Committee was formed and released its report on Dec 8, placing the lapses mainly on the SGH and its poor infection prevention and control practices. MOH was not spared, for gaps were also found in MOH's infectious diseases reporting system.

This led to the formation of  a National Outbreak Response Team led by Minister of State for Health Chee Hong Tat, a "national-level 'SWAT team' in his words, to deal with disease outbreaks.

Back to the press release by MOH: But the only new information we found was located in the second last para, in these 75 words:

"The PSC (Public Service Commission) considered the respective roles and responsibilities of the MOH staff, and their involvement in the incident.  After careful deliberation, the PSC decided that disciplinary action be taken against four MOH officers holding Director-level or equivalent roles for their failure to intervene early and to ensure the infectious disease notification and reporting system was effective and rigorous. The disciplinary sanctions include warnings, stern warnings and financial penalties.  The four officers have accepted the outcomes." MOH Press Release, March 17.

On the same day, SGH also informed the public that disciplinary sanctions were meted out to 12 staff in leadership positions, including senior SGH management. The staff have accepted the disciplinary actions, which include stern warnings and financial penalties.

Straits Times' response

So this was what The Straits Times had to publish on its front page yesterday.

ST had to basically publish the press releases by MOH and SGH, with the MOH spokesperson stating the obvious that those with high level of responsibilities will receive heavier penalties.

Enter The Straits Times' Senior Health Correspondent, Salma Khalik, who endured MOH's non-reply for a day before writing this hard-hitting commentary ("Name those responsible for Hep C infections at SGH") today.

Here are some of the key points she made:

1. She is disappointed... Very disappointed.

"Why do I feel let down by the press releases from the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Singapore General Hospital (SGH) that should have provided closure to the Hepatitis C outbreak at the hospital?"

We agree. After patiently waiting for the MOH to appoint an Independent Review Committee (IRC) instead to review the case and for trusting MOH not to conduct a COI as proposed by Workers' Party, we are still none the wiser which senior folks are held responsible for this and how they messed up.

2. Because no one knows who is at fault, how they were at fault, and what disciplinary action has been taken against each of them.

Khalik tried digging for more details about the actions taken. But was stone-walled by the MOH spokesman who said,

"Adhering to staff and patient confidentiality norms, we would like to assure the public that the staff who were involved in the incident have been disciplined accordingly. The disciplinary actions were decided based on the specific roles, responsibilities and job nature of the officers, as well as the nature of the incident and the impact of their actions in this episode." Straits Times ("Name those responsible for Hep C infections at SGH") 

Another 61 words of not saying much. Reason? Staff and patient confidentiality. 

3.  Khalik pointed out why MOH's reason of "staff confidentiality" is flawed:

i) Singaporeans may think that "doctors and ministry officials get special protection no matter what they do": People in senior positions will live under the shadow of incompetence if people assume that they have failed in their responsibilities. Therefore, an explanation is needed to clarify why they still remain in those positions.

ii) Singaporeans will tar MOH and SGH staff with the same brush: Staff confidentiality cast doubts on the " innocent people at the MOH and the SGH".

iii) Singaporeans will wonder why the outcome is different from the MINDEF case or the cases in the Singapore Medical Council:

For the Dominique Sarron Lee incident, a Committee of Inquiry and a Coroner’s Inquiry were conducted and the officers were named and their actions were made public.

When doctors are found guilty by the Singapore Medical Council, the doctors are named and their actions were revealed.

But MOH wants us to move on, to just trust them that they have investigated and taken action. 

---

So Khalik left MOH with several questions to answer:

"Tell us, was it caused by laziness, negligence or ineptitude - or something else altogether. Tell us also that this incident is viewed seriously by spelling out the actions taken.

If people are left with the impression that doctors and ministry officials get special protection no matter what they do, then confidence in the system will be badly eroded."

Because we are sure that MOH does not want people to start having the same impression as People's Power Party Secretary-General Goh Meng Seng: