<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2008-09-25" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>3</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="261" />
  <endPage num="317" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Bills</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Statutes Amendment (Death Certificates) Bill</name>
      <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000041">
        <heading>STATUTES AMENDMENT (DEATH CERTIFICATES) BILL</heading>
      </text>
      <subproceeding>
        <name>Introduction and First Reading</name>
        <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000042">
          <heading>Introduction and First Reading</heading>
        </text>
        <talker role="member" id="527" kind="speech">
          <name>Mr HANNA</name>
          <house>House of Assembly</house>
          <electorate id="">Mitchell</electorate>
          <startTime time="2008-09-25T10:36:00" />
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000043">
            <timeStamp time="2008-09-25T10:36:00" />
            <by role="member" id="527">Mr HANNA (Mitchell) (10:36):  </by>Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1996 and the Cremation Act 2000. Read a first time.</text>
        </talker>
      </subproceeding>
      <subproceeding>
        <name>Second Reading</name>
        <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000044">
          <heading>Second Reading</heading>
        </text>
        <talker role="member" id="527" kind="speech">
          <name>Mr HANNA</name>
          <house>House of Assembly</house>
          <electorate id="">Mitchell</electorate>
          <startTime time="2008-09-25T10:36:00" />
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000045">
            <timeStamp time="2008-09-25T10:36:00" />
            <by role="member" id="527">Mr HANNA (Mitchell) (10:36):</by>  I move:</text>
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000046">
            <inserted>That this bill be now read a second time.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="20080925d527558e943040a480000047">I bring before the house a tragic story of a woman who died in the Brighton Aged Care Nursing Home in July 2007. The nursing home concerned was owned by doctors Jagdish and Madhu Saraf, and one of them signed the death certificate in relation to the woman who died. I am told that Sturt CIB had concerns about the manner in which the deceased met her death. The fact that the doctor had signed the death certificate allowed for a quick disposal of the deceased's body, and thus it was difficult for police to pursue any inquiries they may have wished to make about the nature of the death. The death certificate suggested cardiac arrest, but staff at the nursing home had made some observations which raised queries that gave rise to that concern by police.</text>
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000048">There is a basic principle here that if it is within the power of someone to sign a death certificate it should be at arm's length, in the sense that if there is any suggestion of wrongdoing in relation to the death there must be an independent view of that death. The bill is straightforward. I must say that, apart from reading about this story in the <term>Independent Weekly</term> and making my own inquiries about it, I noticed that the Minister for the Ageing in the federal Labor government, Justine Elliott, said, in response to the issue:</text>
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000049">
            <inserted>Australian State and Territory laws should be changed to prohibit doctors with financial interests in nursing homes from signing both the death and cremation certificates of their own residents.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="20080925d527558e943040a480000050">It was indeed a cremation in this case which prevented police from pursuing the inquiries that perhaps they should have made. I do not intend to cast any aspersions in relation to the doctors concerned. Obviously, as a matter of financial investment, they have taken an interest in that nursing home, and there is nothing wrong with that, in itself. However, the principle that there must be an independent view of deaths which occur in such institutions, I think, is plainly desirable and I would expect everyone in the house to support it.</text>
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000051">The bill is quite short and clear and it is designed to do no more or less than prevent a doctor with a pecuniary interest in a hospital, nursing home or aged care facility from writing the death certificate for a person who dies in such a facility—in fact, a facility owned by the doctor concerned.</text>
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000052">I commend the bill to the house. Members can read it for themselves. It requires an amendment to the Cremation Act because it is the cremation permit that is perhaps the most important point of the bill. We do not want to see bodies of loved ones cremated before appropriate police investigations, should there be any suspicion whatsoever in relation to the manner of death.</text>
          <text id="20080925d527558e943040a480000053">Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.</text>
        </talker>
      </subproceeding>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>