Alliance for Patient Safety

KM Smotrich raises the following issues: 

What’s the IMMUNITY of the Physician regarding testimony at internal Investigations in hospitals & Health Dept ?   

Can it be used against the physician ?

In Military investigations, i.e. the IAF & IDF, there is an erosion of the Immunity due to 2 amendments of Military law, 

and it is hurting the debriefing capability & investigation. 

Auditing purposes are: 

to “Improve the Performance" by finding out what caused the problem? 

to do “Justice", i.e. Punish whoever should be Punished. 

These 2 objectives conflict with one another. 

To my opinion, clearly the prevailing one for the benefit of the public is the “Learning Experience” over “Justice”. 

Hence, we must ensure that the investigative process intended for “Improvement” shall be absolutely confidential, 

so that the individuals involved shall not fear for themselves. 

Expediting the Process: To wait 3 years for the outcome of the investigation defeats the URGENCY of corrective action.  

It is unacceptable ! 

Hence, we MUST create an administrative process that shortens the time table.    

We should consider establishing 2 independent auditing pathways, one for each goal.  

Without the need to protect defendant’s rights, as the individual shall not incriminate himself, we may be able to accelerate 

the “Learning” process to the benefit of the Public. 

In such a scenario, there is No need for any “Medical Immunity” since there will be absolute confidentiality. That way, the 

Professional parties will be able to draw conclusions and issue recommendations. 

Transparency is very important.

I believe that the Auditing Commission should remain within the Health Dept and a physician should be at its helm, but a 

judge should assist the physician.