{"id":2202527,"date":"2023-10-19T17:25:08","date_gmt":"2023-10-19T08:25:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/koreapro.org\/?p=2202527"},"modified":"2023-11-20T16:39:31","modified_gmt":"2023-11-20T07:39:31","slug":"why-south-koreas-operating-room-surveillance-is-igniting-controversy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/koreapro.org\/2023\/10\/why-south-koreas-operating-room-surveillance-is-igniting-controversy\/","title":{"rendered":"Why South Korea\u2019s operating room surveillance is igniting controversy"},"content":{"rendered":"
In a move to counter medical malpractice and restore shaken public trust, South Korea has <\/span>mandated<\/span><\/a> the installation of surveillance cameras in operating rooms across the nation. This groundbreaking decision, primarily driven by disturbing incidents including unauthorized <\/span>surrogate surgeries<\/span><\/a> and <\/span>sexual crimes<\/span><\/a>, marks South Korea as <\/span>the first country<\/span><\/a> globally to enforce such a measure.<\/span><\/p>\n The mandate, part of the <\/span>revised Medical Service Act<\/span><\/a>, represents a significant shift in the dynamics of medical accountability, intending to safeguard unconscious or anesthetized patients at their most vulnerable. Yet it also ushers in <\/span>complex debates<\/span><\/a> concerning medical ethics, patient privacy and trust in healthcare settings.<\/span><\/p>\n SURROGATE SURGERY<\/b><\/p>\n Central to the legislative action was the tragic case of <\/span>Kwon Dae-hee<\/span><\/a>. In 2016, Kwon, a young man seeking facial contouring surgery \u2014 a high-risk procedure involving bone alteration \u2014 fell victim to reckless medical practices at a plastic surgery clinic in Seoul.<\/span><\/p>\n CCTV footage from the operating room revealed that the lead surgeon was operating on multiple patients simultaneously and left Kwon mid-procedure, delegating the task of controlling excessive bleeding to a nursing assistant without proper medical licensure.<\/span><\/p>\n Kwon\u2019s death catalyzed public outrage, spotlighting the need for accountability and transparency in operating rooms. Clinics, often perceived as prioritizing profit over patient care, have been found to engage in practices that significantly <\/span>elevate the risk of medical accidents<\/span><\/a>, such as treating numerous patients in a production-line manner, leaving patients like Kwon to suffer the consequences.<\/span><\/p>\n The fallout from this case and the persistent advocacy from the victim\u2019s family and public supporters were instrumental in the <\/span>legislative push<\/span><\/a> for surveillance in operating rooms.<\/span><\/p>\n The evidence provided by the CCTV footage in Kwon\u2019s case was indisputable, leading not only to court-ordered <\/span>compensation<\/span><\/a> for the victim\u2019s family but also to a three-year jail sentence for the surgeon involved.<\/span><\/p>\n NEW LEGISLATION<\/b><\/p>\n The revised Medical Service Act, enacted on Sept. 25, stipulates that medical clinics nationwide must equip their surgical facilities with closed-circuit cameras, a proactive step designed to act as a deterrent against malpractice or crime.<\/span><\/p>\n However, the law is nuanced in its application. Recordings are not automatic; they occur at the explicit request of patients or their legal representatives, marking an attempt to balance privacy concerns with the push for transparency. Medical staff, however, retain the right to refuse recording, given \u201cvalid reasons\u201d \u2014 a vague term yet to be rigorously defined.<\/span><\/p>\n Despite the legal obligations, there have been instances of malicious compliance, exposing loopholes that jeopardize the law\u2019s efficacy. A poignant illustration is the case of a woman in her seventies who died during an operation. Despite the presence of installed cameras, the surgery went <\/span>unrecorded<\/span><\/a> due to the family\u2019s failure to explicitly file a request for a recording before the procedure.<\/span><\/p>\n Instead of verbally instructing the patient and her family of their new rights under the revised law, the clinic posted an obscure notice on a wall where patients do not typically look.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n This incident, among others, raises concerns about the ease with which medical facilities might circumvent regulations.<\/span><\/p>\n Further, the legislation states that the mandate allows for discretion in high-risk, urgent surgical cases demanding immediate and undistracted medical intervention or scenarios where recording might compromise the treatment.<\/span><\/p>\n The onus of request lies with the patient, a point of contention if patients are unaware of their rights or the new measure.<\/span><\/p>\n Further, the legislation does not automatically grant viewing rights to the recorded parties. To access the footage, patients or their families must secure the <\/span>consent of all medical staff<\/span><\/a> present during the surgery \u2014 a stipulation that could prove challenging, especially if the footage contains evidence unfavorable to the medical personnel involved.<\/span><\/p>\n