did he take the hippocrates' oath or hyprocrites' oath?
(pardon the spelling error in the title)
excerpt from channelnewsasia
Doctor censured by SMC for misconduct
SINGAPORE: A 35-year-old doctor has been censured by the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) for having engaged in an improper act or conduct that brought disrepute to the medical profession.
Dr Ho Mien had made claims for monetary compensation on the grounds of having completed night call duties, when in fact, he had not actually performed such night call duties.
Dr Ho was practising as a House Officer at the Division of Medicine at Singapore General Hospital when he made the claims in 2008.
The Disciplinary Committee of the SMC said Dr Ho's conduct was not a trivial matter, and that if left unchecked, such conduct would have a detrimental effect on the training of doctors.
The committee added that the wrong message would be sent to doctors under training if it were to condone Dr Ho's conduct. It said that a substantial punishment would be appropriate so that practitioners are deterred from such conduct.
But the committee considered several mitigating factors in its deliberation.
Dr Ho had produced substantial and impressive testimonial in favour of his abilities as a doctor and of his contributions to public service.
The committee also noted that the incidents of misconduct took place early in Dr Ho's career. The committee was therefore reluctant to impose a financial hardship on him as an "act of mercy".
(pardon the spelling error in the title)
excerpt from channelnewsasia
Doctor censured by SMC for misconduct
SINGAPORE: A 35-year-old doctor has been censured by the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) for having engaged in an improper act or conduct that brought disrepute to the medical profession.
Dr Ho Mien had made claims for monetary compensation on the grounds of having completed night call duties, when in fact, he had not actually performed such night call duties.
Dr Ho was practising as a House Officer at the Division of Medicine at Singapore General Hospital when he made the claims in 2008.
The Disciplinary Committee of the SMC said Dr Ho's conduct was not a trivial matter, and that if left unchecked, such conduct would have a detrimental effect on the training of doctors.
The committee added that the wrong message would be sent to doctors under training if it were to condone Dr Ho's conduct. It said that a substantial punishment would be appropriate so that practitioners are deterred from such conduct.
But the committee considered several mitigating factors in its deliberation.
Dr Ho had produced substantial and impressive testimonial in favour of his abilities as a doctor and of his contributions to public service.
The committee also noted that the incidents of misconduct took place early in Dr Ho's career. The committee was therefore reluctant to impose a financial hardship on him as an "act of mercy".
Last edited:
