Neville Wran's Daughter Charged With Murder

[icyfroth]

The youngest daughter of the late NSW premier Neville Wran is one of three people allegedly involved in a double stabbing that left one man dead at a notorious inner-Sydney housing commission unit block.

Wran, the goddaughter of Kerry Packer, is studying modern history, her Facebook page says.

It is not yet clear what motivated the stabbings, but it was likely the attackers knew the victims and the violence might have escalated from an argument, police said at the time.

Entire Article Here

How sad. That's a long way down for a young person born into a such privileged family.

It's thought to have been over drugs.

[cherry*135]

Colic wrote:
"You refuse to acknowledge that Ritalin is often used as a recreational drug and that some doctor shopping users

manipulate their symptoms to get access to the "drug' they are seeking while others may look towards siblings medications."

Dr shopping - these drugs are on a controlled list and Drs have to get prior authorisation from e.g, in NSW, the NSW Ministry of Health before they can prescribe them.

"Assessment for ADHD should be performed by a specialist clinician. It should be comprehensive to ensure that the individualised management plan developed for the person addresses his or her specific needs, is culturally appropriate, and takes into consideration the family situation, including the capacity to adhere to the plan.

As a minimum, the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria should be met for a diagnosis of ADHD to occur.

If medication is to be used in the management of ADHD, psychostimulants are the first line of treatment. Prescribing of psychostimulants requires prior authorisation by the NSW Ministry of Health and must be in accordance with management criteria issued by the NSW Ministry of Health."

Doctors are risking their careers IF they prescribe controlled drugs to those not entitled to them. Because of the authorisations required, it would be picked up if they are prescribing excessive amounts of any controlled drugs.

Pharmacies have registers where they must record certain over the counter medicines ( some types of painkillers) sold to the person (id requried) buying them, to stop addicts buying large quantities of them. People can't just go to different pharmacies and stock up either.

We have a new Medical Clinic (bulk billed) just opened. They have a sign up saying they won't prescribe any drugs of addiction (Schedule 8 drugs, including opoid medications) to anyone.

1998 -2004, in NZ, in an area I came from which is why I remember it. It is on the internet, avail for public access.

Charge characteristics: Inappropriate prescribing, falsification of documents

Charge:

A Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) charged that Dr Brock-Smith was guilty of professional misconduct. The particulars of the charge alleged that Dr Brock-Smith supplied and/or facilitated access by a restricted person (pursuant to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975) to controlled drugs, as follows:

In June 1988 supplied methyl phenidate (Ritalin) tablets to a restricted person, “A”.
During May 2004 supplied diazepam tablets in an envelope to a restricted person, “A”.
During November 2003 and April 2004, he wrote prescriptions for diazepam and temazepam on at least two occasions for false patients, to enable a restricted person, “A”, to obtain these drugs.
During 2004, on at least two occasions from his surgery window, supplied to a restricted person, “A”, diazepam tablets.

Finding

Dr Brock-Smith pleaded guilty. The Tribunal found Dr Brock-Smith guilty of professional misconduct.

http://www.hpdt.org.nz/Default.aspx?tabid=104



.

[colic2bullsgirlore]

http://www.sistersinside.com.au/media/Drugs%20and%20Doctors%20how%20the%20law%20responds%20to%20doct...

PDF above How the law responds to Doctor shopping University of Queensland 2013

The paper seeks to critically examine the prevelance of Docotr Shopping

section 4 pages 5 to 7

Background

Techniques

Data

Role of Medical Practicioners

[cherry*135]

Research by students.

Disclaimer
The authors do not warrant or represent the accuracy, currency or completeness of information or material contained within this publication. The Research Report is for informative purposes only and doesn't constitute legal advice. Any opinions expressed represents those held only by the authors.

[cherry*135]

"A key difficulty to properly detecting the incidence of doctor-shopping remains the status of pharmaceuticals as controlled substances, which are legitimate treatments for recognised medical conditions.14 It therefore becomes challenging to differentiate data sets in order to determine what prescriptions were obtained through doctor-shopping practices. Raw pharmaceutical data is available through publications such as the Australian Statistics on Medicines, which draws on data collected through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme"

[punch*drunk]

Dr shopping - these drugs are on a controlled list and Drs have to get prior authorisation from e.g, in NSW, the NSW Ministry of Health before they can prescribe them.

Same in Victoria, not sure who it is but they have to make a phone call before prescribing and I think they give the name and medicare number of the patient. And really, the money spent on pediatricians getting your child assessed and prescribed Ritalin would far outweigh the money someone might make onselling it. And what happens to the poor child that needed the Ritalin prescribed in the first place, they just go without? How many people would really do that to their child?

[colic2bullsgirlore]

---

@am*3 wrote:
"A key difficulty to properly detecting the incidence of doctor-shopping remains the status of pharmaceuticals as controlled substances, which are legitimate treatments for recognised medical conditions.14 It therefore becomes challenging to differentiate data sets in order to determine what prescriptions were obtained through doctor-shopping practices. Raw pharmaceutical data is available through publications such as the Australian Statistics on Medicines, which draws on data collected through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme"

---

---

---

---

@am*3 wrote:
"A key difficulty to properly detecting the incidence of doctor-shopping remains the status of pharmaceuticals as controlled substances, which are legitimate treatments for recognised medical conditions.14 It therefore becomes challenging to differentiate data sets in order to determine what prescriptions were obtained through doctor-shopping practices. Raw pharmaceutical data is available through publications such as the Australian Statistics on Medicines, which draws on data collected through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme"

---

---

---

The sentence is finished on the next page

(‘PBS’). If it is accepted that a fraction of that 8.5% relates to medication obtained through doctor shopping, then the economic impact of doctor shopping becomes more apparent.

CONCLUSION It may be suggested that there is, to some extent, over regulation of the provisions of medical services.

This is especially true when examining the prevalence of doctor shopping.

A key issue with the regulatory bodies currently operating is that there are many distinct bodies, with slightly different aims, yet having areas of overlap between them.

This leads to inefficiency within the system.

Additionally, the bodies do not appear to target doctor shopping directly rather, the issue has been addressed indirectly through the flow on effects of other targets the bodies have tried to meet.

Overall then regulatory bodies would benefit from direct action on the doctor shopping issue.

Over regulation may be undesirable, but in the absence of effective common law solutions, regulation and education appear to be the only viable ways to address this issue.

A stronger focus on doctor shopping and the surrounding issues at tertiary levels would be ideal, as well as a repeated focus throughout the professional development of medical practitioners.

It is believed that if medical practitioners were more aware of the problem, they would be less inclined to prescribe to start with, which would go a long way towards reducing the incidence of doctor-shopping

[colic2bullsgirlore]

From The pharmacist

In 2000, the ratio of IV heroin use to IV prescription opiate use was 14:1; now for every two heroin users there is one IV prescription opiate injector,’ he said.(2013)

http://www.psa.org.au/download/ap/apjan13/Cover-story.pdf

http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/ndarc/resources/SA_IDRS_2012_FINAL.pdf

figures are available on link above reincrease in licit IV use (oxycodone) ^^^

The fact is they get it somewhere and if it is not the Dr or a Dr shopping patient that supplies it then... what's left??

[cherry*135]

That research article also stated it is more likely inexperienced Doctors that are likely to fall for the addicts request who is Dr shopping. It suggests they need more training in that area.

In all professions there will always be a few rogue ones also.

There is no financial gain to a Dr to jump through the hoops to prescribe a controlled drug to a patient who is not entitled to it. Why would a doctor knowingly do that and risk their career?

Perhaps the Medicare fee for the patient visit?? $30?? Not worth breaking the law over.

[cherry*135]

"The fact is they get it somewhere and if it is not the Dr or a Dr shopping patient that supplies it then... what's left??"

Internet websites, selling illicit drugs??

"‘Way of the future'
Dark websites appear to be growing in popularity among Australians, who are attracted by the convenience and anonymity, the huge variety of drugs on offer, and the promise of cheap prices and reliable supply.

A new National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (NDARC) report found the number of Australian-based sellers on Xxxx xxxx more than doubled between February and September 2013, from 53 to 129. International dealers are also increasing their offerings here: the number of sellers posting to Australia rose from 353 to 450 over this period.

"It's obvious that these marketplaces are the way of the future in terms of online purchasing of drugs," says NDARC researcher Joe Van Buskirk.

Worryingly for the medical profession, Xxxxxx appears symptomatic of a wider trend: prescription drugs have risen up the pecking order since the previous NDARC report and are now second only to marijuana in terms of their availability on Xxxx xxxx"

[colic2bullsgirlore]

Am3 you seem to have this thing re defending doctors.

You prefer to believe that addicts are in the main procuring their prescription drugs from Silk Road for 20 bucks a pill on the internet rather than obtaining a box (oxycodone) for $6.90 on the PBS in their main street.

You use the excuses below that a Doctor would not risk their career for such small recompense......

The fact is the definition of prescription/doctor shopping is that typically the Dr. is fooled

ie they don't realize they are overprescribing (basically the patients lie) which renders your "ah they wouldnt do that for

30 bucks" excuse for what it is.... blind faith

You managed to find a (no responsibility) disclaimer in the students thesis... but in the next post you decided to quote

from the same because it suited your position.

http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/provider/pbs/prescription-shopping/

Definition of doctor/prescription shopping

About prescription shopping Prescription shopping is when patients unknowingly or deliberately obtain more medicines than is medically needed.

This is often done by visiting many doctors, without telling them about their other consultations.

Am3 quotes

"Doctors are risking their careers IF they prescribe controlled drugs to those not entitled to them. Because of the authorisations required, it would be picked up if they are prescribing excessive amounts of any controlled drugs."

"There is no financial gain to a Dr to jump through the hoops to prescribe a controlled drug to a patient who is not entitled to it. Why would a doctor knowingly do that and risk their career?"

"Perhaps the Medicare fee for the patient visit?? $30?? Not worth breaking the law over."

Mid North Coast health service link and copy and paste below

http://www.nps.org.au/health-professionals/health-news-evidence/2014/tamper-proof-oxycodone

What are current prescribing patterns?

In another study using 2010/11 data, about 44% of GPs' opioid prescriptions were for chronic non-cancer conditions. Only 3.5% of opioids were prescribed for pain caused by cancer, and the remainder (more than half) were presumably for acute conditions.

Most prescriptions (58.2%) were for musculoskeletal problems, with back problems accounting for 27%. Osteoarthritis accounted for 9.7% and generalised multi-site pain for 6.6%.

Considered prescribing is key Although reformulated oxycodone may push opioid abusers to look for alternatives, the evidence so far from the USA suggests it will not reduce opioid abuse in total.

There is scope for better adherence to guidelines:

A recent survey found none of the 404 NSW GPs responding was compliant with all the local health district guidelines, and fewer than one third 'usually employed' most guideline items.

Concordance with guidelines was lowest for strategies designed to reduce abuse, such as the management of aberrant behaviours.

Only 16% reported often contacting the prescription shopping information service in the last 2 years when concerned about aberrant opioid behaviors.

While an abuse-deterrent oxycodone formulation is now available, GPs can reduce the potential for abuse even more by adhering to prescribing guidelines.

Anyways I still go back to my original comment

Prohibition caused Mcnultys death and Wran and her boyfriends impending incarceration...... and many many others.

many of the addicrts have already made the switch...society just needs to catch up with them.

Controlled supply (not like the uncontrolled legal supply that is evidenced by my posts above) is the key to addiction

and the panacea to the social rot that it fathers with the offer of education counselling and harm minimization

techniques