Covid continues to divide opinion: controversy over the measure to reinstate anti-vax doctors
The measure provides for the possibility of re-registration on the Register for doctors who have been struck off due to non-malicious circumstances linked to the pandemic, such as the promotion of anti-scientific treatments
Key points
To open a window for the immediate re-registration with the Medical Council of doctors and healthcare professionals who promoted anti-scientific treatments during the Covid pandemic and were struck off as a result. This is the provision at the heart of an amendment tabled by Fratelli d’Italia, which was approved by the Social Affairs Committee as part of the draft enabling bill on the healthcare professions; the amendment has sparked strong criticism, particularly from the Medical Association and the opposition parties. Essentially, the amendment provides for the possibility of re-registration on the roll for doctors struck off due to non-malicious acts linked to the pandemic.
What does the measure at the centre of the controversy entail?
The amendment introduces a new Article 42-bis into Presidential Decree No. 221 of 1950 and provides that healthcare professionals struck off the register “for non-malicious acts related to the pandemic” may apply for re-registration. The provision does not provide for the automatic reinstatement of struck-off professionals, but allows them to submit an application for re-registration within a defined timeframe, namely within 60 days of the law coming into force, and is subject to specific conditions, namely that the appeal before the Central Commission for Healthcare Professionals (CCEPS) is still pending. Where the removal from the register is the result of a criminal conviction, the application may only be made after rehabilitation. The measure has sparked an immediate clash with the opposition, which, speaking with one voice, is crying ‘shame’ at the ‘reinstatement of anti-vax healthcare staff’, but also with the Federation of Medical Associations, which is pointing the finger at ‘unjustified interference’. The National Federation of Medical Associations speaks of a “delegitimisation of those responsible for upholding the Code of Ethics”: “We are dismayed, disheartened and disappointed” by “an affront to the victims and to all healthcare professionals who have sacrificed their lives to continue providing care”, explains Fnomceo president Filippo Anelli. Striking off the register is, in fact, a last resort: it certifies that the healthcare professional has chosen to remove themselves from the scientific community.”
The political clash between the government and the opposition
Following the approval, opposition arose: “It is an unprecedented disgrace,” the PD, M5S, AVS, IV, Azione and +Europa groups wrote in a joint statement. “This sets an extremely dangerous precedent: it rewrites the history of a dramatic period in the country’s history, whilst today rewarding those who shirked that obligation,” the statement continued. “Enough of using Covid for political battles, once again legitimising anti-vaxxers for purely electoral purposes.” The Medical Council, as the Five Star Movement MPs point out, “only imposes disbarment in cases of exceptional gravity linked to anti-scientific beliefs that cause harm to patients. We will oppose any attempt to sweep this under the carpet”. Buonguerrieri, speaking on behalf of FdI, “affirms the desire to put an end to this persecution and restore healthcare professionals’ true freedom to practise in accordance with science and their conscience”. From the left, he adds, “they want to continue an absurd witch-hunt that is long past its sell-by date”. Ilenia Malavasi, a PD MP, responds: “That vaccination requirement was not an ideological whim, but a public health measure adopted to protect vulnerable patients entrusted to the care of those who chose not to be vaccinated. To call it ‘persecution’ is an insult to science,” she remarks. The debate will continue in the Chamber of Deputies, where the reform of the healthcare professions could be brought before the summer recess.
Simi Internists: no to reinstating unvaccinated doctors – they harm the public and the NHS
“It is with a mixture of astonishment and concern that we have learnt of the Government’s decision to allow the reinstatement of anti-vaccine doctors who were suspended during the Covid-19 pandemic for failing to comply with the vaccination requirement laid down by current legislation and who, in many cases, were subject to disciplinary measures by their professional bodies. As a scientific society, we feel it is our duty to express our opposition to a decision that allows professionals who have publicly taken positions contrary to established scientific evidence and the recommendations issued by leading national and international scientific institutions to return to the National Health Service.” This is the position taken by the Executive Board of Simi – the Italian Society of Internal Medicine – in a statement. “It would, however, be simplistic to limit the debate exclusively to Covid-19 vaccination,” the internists point out. “In many cases, in fact, anti-vaccine stances have extended to vaccination programmes that have been well-established for decades, including those that have made it possible to control or eliminate extremely serious diseases such as polio, diphtheria and measles. Maintaining adequate vaccination coverage is one of the main tools for protecting public health, and a decline in coverage poses a real risk of epidemics re-emerging, even in high-income countries,” notes Simi, which urges us to look across the Atlantic: “Recent events in the United States, where a decline in vaccination coverage has been linked to the resurgence of major measles outbreaks, demonstrate just how quickly diseases once thought to be under control can re-emerge, and how vital it is to maintain public confidence in vaccination programmes.”
