Battle between private doctors and public health activists.

Proposed amendments to the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment Act lead to strong opposition from private doctors led by IMA.

*The Slum Janandolana Karnataka is among the 16 organisations of health activists, labour rights organisations, sex workers, and women’s rights groups that have pushed for the amendments to the Act, which they believe is pro-people.

*Clinical Establishments Act – a law to regulate all health establishments in the country – in 2010. But only 11 states and union territories adopted the Clinical Establishments Act so far.

Act &Amendments	Public health activists *Slum Janandolana Karnataka	IMA
The Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act, 2007. In the 2007 Act, only people who ran hospitals could be penalised. These penalties were for running hospitals without registration (a maximum jail term of seven years and a fine) and not maintaining clinical records (six months in jail and fine).	Wants  amendments to punish  those who violate patient’s rights or medical ethics by  inflating the bills &unnecessary treatments	Not opposed to the entire Act,but opposing the draconian amendments those take away the professional freedom. ·         Why the govt doesn’t implement the law on quacks who are running hospitals?
Why amendments are mooted?	Private hospitals harassing poor patients who had no effective legal recourse.	They can complain to medical council, consumer and criminal courts. So no need of draconian amendments.
Amendment-1: price caps for medical treatments and procedures and to strengthen district grievance redressal systems.	O.K. No basis to the statement,” that smaller Hospitals will shut down because of price caps. “We have to understand that health care is essential services. Nobody wants to buy hospitalisation care. People spend on health care under duress.” Government can consider differential pricing for rural and urban areas.	Objection. The government has no right to fix rates for treatment and procedure. “They can only fix rates for state health insurance schemes. For years the private sector cross-subsidising healthcare, charging rich patients more while charging poorer patients at concession rates. “If the price is fixed, many nursing homes in the rural areas will shut down (because they will not be able to cope with prices),”  “We cannot have the same price for a procedure from Bengaluru to Belur .
Amendment-2: The amendment proposes penalising doctors for not displaying rates for treatments .	O.K.	objection.
Why amendments are mooted?	several private medical establishments are still not registered by district authorities.	DMHOs have the power to enforce all hospitals to get registered with the present law. so,No need of amendments.
The Bill emphasises the importance of informed consent - about costs procedures, risks and benefits before the treatment is started.	O.K.	No objection.
Govt agrees to put a clause,”that no court can take cognisance of a complaint against a private medical establishment unless the district authority that registers such establishments submits a complaint to the court in writing	Strongly disagreed.	IMA Agrees but expressed that its not sufficient.
creation of district grievance redressal committees that can look into complaints, especially about violations of patients rights.	When private hospitals in Kalburgi district were reported to have performed thousands of unnecessary hysterectomies. During an enquiry by district health authorities, many hospitals refused to part with their documents. In 2016, the people running these errant private establishments could only be booked for non maintenance of records under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act, relevant sections of Pre Conception and Pre Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1995 and the Bio Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998.	Objection. Its unnecessary and may lead to harassment of doctors.
why the act doesn't involve govt hospitals under its ambit? why this act only applicable to private hospitals?	the standards for the Govt hospitals are already set by the central government under the Indian Public Health Standards, but since more people (80%)access private hospitals, they need to be more transparent.	the Bill was discriminatory because it does not bring public sector hospitals into its ambit.