Pathways for developing a 'smart' workforce : does the achievement of formal workplace qualifications encourage participation in higher education?

The purpose of this paper is to investigate a public workforce education initiative in the context of State and agency policies designed to enhance employee capabilities to adapt to a volatile and changing environment. In particular, we are concerned with public employees’ experience of a higher educational pathway that resulted in their obtaining a Diploma level qualification. In addition to understanding the employees’ experience of this pathway we were interested in whether the experience contributed to their openness to the prospect of university level education. We conducted telephone interviews with a sample of participants from the program. Employees reported very positive experience of the program; in particular employees reported enhanced efficacy beliefs, a strong sense of achievement, and a feeling of recognition. This experience is explained by four main factors; (1) a program design that was well aligned with the employees learning needs, (2) strong support by organisational staff who delivered and assessed participants on capability criteria, (3) strong management support for employees’ participation, (4) an academic ceremony that provided participants with public recognition of their achievement by valued others. Participants’ motivation to participate was primarily intrinsic rather than extrinsic. Participants in the study reported that their experience in this educational pathway gave them the confidence to consider the possibility of university level education. The paper also discusses the practitioner-academic collaboration that led to the development of this paper.

Contractual relationships for better stewardship of privatised critical infrastructures

Governments increasingly rely on forms of privatisation to provide critical public infrastructure yet when those infrastructures fail to meet community expectations government bears the political and economic risks, being held accountable by the public as steward for those infrastructures. Reconfiguration of the contractual relationships may achieve better stewardship. Many of the forms of privatization rely on Agency theory prescriptions, conceptualizing organisations and individuals as motivated solely by self-interest. Stewardship theory (Van Slyke 2007) has developed as a complement to Agency theory offering the possibility of contractual relationships which maximize stewardship outcome. Stewardship theory asserts that pro-stewardship factors cause the agent/steward to act in the interests of the principal. This research has interrogated the literature finding that of the pro-stewardship factors, sense of responsibility is pre-eminent and has a significant link to the agent acting as a steward. The research has explored how important it is that the steward feel sense of responsibility and the actions that sense of responsibility. Case studies of privatized core elements of urban water systems infrastructure were explored. Data has been gathered primarily from archival sources and individual interviews of government and private sector executives key to those systems. This paper reports the findings as to the extent of stewardship, how important it is that the steward acts in the interests of the principal, even to the steward’s detriment and the importance of the steward feeling a sense of responsibility. The actions which increase that sense of responsibility will be assembled to position the research to better proceed with the analysis of the data as to these actions.

The empire of cancer: Gene patents and cancer voices

In his book, The Emperor of All Maladies, Siddhartha Mukherjee writes a history of cancer — "It is a chronicle of an ancient disease — once a clandestine, 'whispered-about' illness — that has metamorphosed into a lethal shape-shifting entity imbued with such penetrating metaphorical, medical, scientific, and political potency that cancer is often described as the defining plague of our generation." Increasingly, an important theme in the history of cancer is the role of law, particularly in the field of intellectual property law. It is striking that a number of contemporary policy debates over intellectual property and public health have concerned cancer research, diagnosis, and treatment. In the area of access to essential medicines, there has been much debate over Novartis’ patent application in respect of Glivec, a treatment for leukaemia. India’s Supreme Court held that the Swiss company’s patent application violated a safeguard provision in India’s patent law designed to stop evergreening. In the field of tobacco control, the Australian Government introduced plain packaging for tobacco products in order to address the health burdens associated with the tobacco epidemic. This regime was successfully defended in the High Court of Australia. In the area of intellectual property and biotechnology, there have been significant disputes over the Utah biotechnology company Myriad Genetics and its patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are related to breast cancer and ovarian cancer. The Federal Court of Australia handed down a decision on the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patent in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 in February 2013. The Supreme Court of the United States heard a challenge to the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patents in this area in April 2013, and handed down a judgment in July 2013. Such disputes have involved tensions between intellectual property rights, and public health. This article focuses upon one of these important test cases involving intellectual property, public health, and cancer research. In June 2010, Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy brought an action in the Federal Court of Australia against the validity of a BRCA1 patent — held by Myriad Genetics Inc, the Centre de Recherche du Chul, the Cancer Institute of Japan and Genetic Technologies Limited. Yvonne D’Arcy — a Brisbane woman who has had treatment for breast cancer — maintained: "I believe that what they are doing is morally and ethically corrupt and that big companies should not control any parts of the human body." She observed: "For my daughter, I've had her have [sic] mammograms, etc, because of me but I would still like her to be able to have the test to see if the mutation gene is in there from me." The applicants made the following arguments: "Genes and the information represented by human gene sequences are products of nature universally present in each individual, and the information content of a human gene sequence is fixed. Genetic variations or mutations are products of nature. The isolation of the BRCA1 gene mutation from the human body constitutes no more than a medical or scientific discovery of a naturally occurring phenomenon and does not give rise to a patentable invention." The applicants also argued that "the alleged invention is not a patentable invention in that, so far as claimed in claims 1–3, it is not a manner of manufacture within the meaning of s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies". The applicants suggested that "the alleged invention is a mere discovery". Moreover, the applicants contended that "the alleged invention of each of claims 1-3 is not a patentable invention because they are claims for biological processes for the generation of human beings". The applicants, though, later dropped the argument that the patent claims related to biological processes for the generation of human beings. In February 2013, Nicholas J of the Federal Court of Australia considered the case brought by Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy against Myriad Genetics. The judge presented the issues in the case, as follows: "The issue that arises in this case is of considerable importance. It relates to the patentability of genes, or gene sequences, and the practice of 'gene patenting'. Briefly stated, the issue to be decided is whether under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) a valid patent may be granted for a claim that covers naturally occurring nucleic acid — either deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA) — that has been 'isolated'". In this context, the word "isolated" implies that naturally occurring nucleic acid found in the cells of the human body, whether it be DNA or RNA, has been removed from the cellular environment in which it naturally exists and separated from other cellular components also found there. The genes found in the human body are made of nucleic acid. The particular gene with which the patent in suit is concerned (BRCA1) is a human breast and ovarian cancer disposing gene. Various mutations that may be present in this gene have been linked to various forms of cancer including breast cancer and ovarian cancer.' The judge held in this particular case that Myriad Genetics’ patent claims were a "manner of manufacture" under s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies and s 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth). The matter is currently under appeal in the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. This article interprets the dispute over Myriad Genetics in light of the scholarly work of Nobel Laureate Professor Joseph Stiglitz on inequality. Such work has significant explanatory power in the context of intellectual property and biotechnology. First, Stiglitz has contended that "societal inequality was a result not just of the laws of economics, but also of how we shape the economy — through politics, including through almost every aspect of our legal system". Stiglitz is concerned that "our intellectual property regime … contributes needlessly to the gravest form of inequality." He maintains: "The right to life should not be contingent on the ability to pay." Second, Stiglitz worries that "some of the most iniquitous aspects of inequality creation within our economic system are a result of 'rent-seeking': profits, and inequality, generated by manipulating social or political conditions to get a larger share of the economic pie, rather than increasing the size of that pie". He observes that "the most iniquitous aspect of this wealth appropriation arises when the wealth that goes to the top comes at the expense of the bottom." Third, Stiglitz comments: "When the legal regime governing intellectual property rights is designed poorly, it facilitates rent-seeking" and "the result is that there is actually less innovation and more inequality." He is concerned that intellectual property regimes "create monopoly rents that impede access to health both create inequality and hamper growth more generally." Finally, Stiglitz has recommended: "Government-financed research, foundations, and the prize system … are alternatives, with major advantages, and without the inequality-increasing disadvantages of the current intellectual property rights system.’" This article provides a critical analysis of the Australian litigation and debate surrounding Myriad Genetics’ patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1. First, it considers the ruling of Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia that Myriad Genetics’ patent was a manner of manufacture as it related to an artificially created state of affairs, and not mere products of nature. Second, it examines the policy debate over gene patents in Australia, and its relevance to the litigation involving Myriad Genetics. Third, it examines comparative law, and contrasts the ruling by Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia with developments in the United States, Canada, and the European Union. Fourth, this piece considers the reaction to the decision of Nicholas at first instance in Australia. Fifth, the article assesses the prospects of an appeal to the Full Federal Court of Australia over the Myriad Genetics’ patents. Finally, this article observes that, whatever happens in respect of litigation against Myriad Genetics, there remains controversy over Genetic Technologies Limited. The Melbourne firm has been aggressively licensing and enforcing its related patents on non-coding DNA and genomic mapping.

Molecular epidemiology of respiratory viruses in a paediatric cohort from Indonesia

Acute lower respiratory tract infections (ALRTIs) are a common cause of morbidity and mortality among children under 5 years of age and are found worldwide, with pneumonia as the most severe manifestation. Although the incidence of severe disease varies both between individuals and countries, there is still no clear understanding of what causes this variation. Studies of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) have traditionally not focused on viral causes of disease due to a paucity of diagnostic tools. However, with the emergence of molecular techniques, it is now known that viruses outnumber bacteria as the etiological agents of childhood CAP, especially in children under 2 years of age. The main objective of this study was to investigate viruses contributing to disease severity in cases of childhood ALRTI, using a two year cohort study following 2014 infants and children enrolled in Bandung, Indonesia. A total of 352 nasopharyngeal washes collected from 256 paediatric ALRTI patients were used for analysis. A subset of samples was screened using a novel microarray pathogen detection method that identified respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human metapneumovirus (hMPV) and human rhinovirus (HRV) in the samples. Real-time RT-PCR was used both for confirming and quantifying viruses found in the nasopharyngeal samples. Viral copy numbers were determined and normalised to the numbers of human cells collected with the use of 18S rRNA. Molecular epidemiology was performed for RSV A and hMPV using sequences to the glycoprotein gene and nucleoprotein gene respectively, to determine genotypes circulating in this Indonesian paediatric cohort. This study found that HRV (119/352; 33.8%) was the most common virus detected as the cause of respiratory tract infections in this cohort, followed by the viral pathogens RSV A (73/352; 20.7%), hMPV (30/352; 8.5%) and RSV B (12/352; 3.4%). Co-infections of more than two viruses were detected in 31 episodes (defined as an infection which occurred more than two weeks apart), accounting for 8.8% of the 352 samples tested or 15.4% of the 201 episodes with at least one virus detected. RSV A genotypes circulating in this population were predominantly GA2, GA5 and GA7, while hMPV genotypes circulating were mainly A2a (27/30; 90.0%), B2 (2/30; 6.7%) and A1 (1/30; 3.3%). This study found no evidence of disease severity associated either with a specific virus or viral strain, or with viral load. However, this study did find a significant association with co-infection of RSV A and HRV with severe disease (P = 0.006), suggesting that this may be a novel cause of severe disease.

Between a rock and a hard place : what do public sector leaders learn from the past as they lead into the future

The purpose of this paper is to bring leadership context into sharper focus and to suggest there are strong constraints on public leaders’ discretion to lead in ways consistent with NPM or NPL. Much of the existing public leadership research focuses on the individual leader and tends to give little attention to the influence of context. This lack of focus on leader context adversely affects our ability to build public leadership capacity. We draw on prior research to establish that (1) there are strong contextual constraints on public leaders’ capacity to lead in ways consistent with NPL, (2) public leaders are subject to contradictory messages and for the most part these contradictions are unacknowledged and unresolved, the impact of which is confusion and informal power-politics, (3) the task of leader transition from traditional leadership to new public leadership is very much underestimated and requires a new way to think about leadership development. On the basis of this analysis, we argue that public leaders find themselves between a rock and a hard place.

Development and pilot study of the Primary Care Practice Improvement Tool (PC-PIT) : an innovative approach

Objective To assess the usability and validity of the Primary Care Practice Improvement Tool (PC-PIT), a practice performance improvement tool based on 13 key elements identified by a systematic review. It was co-created with a range of partners and designed specifically for primary health care. Design This pilot study examined the PC-PIT using a formative assessment framework and mixed-methods research design. Setting and participants Six high-functioning general practices in Queensland, Australia, between February and July 2013. A total of 28 staff participated — 10 general practitioners, six practice or community nurses, 12 administrators (four practice managers; one business manager and eight reception or general administrative staff). Main outcome measures Readability, content validity and staff perceptions of the PC-PIT. Results The PC-PIT offers an appropriate and acceptable approach to internal quality improvement in general practice. Quantitative assessment scores and qualitative data from all staff identified two areas in which the PC-PIT required modification: a reduction in the indicative reading age, and simplification of governance-related terms and concepts. Conclusion The PC-PIT provides an innovative approach to address the complexity of organisational improvement in general practice and primary health care. This initial validation will be used to develop a suite of supporting, high-quality and free-to-access resources to enhance the use of the PC-PIT in general practice. Based on these findings, a national trial is now underway.

Doctors' knowledge of the law on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment

Objectives To examine the level of knowledge of doctors about the law on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack decision-making capacity, and factors associated with a higher level of knowledge. Design, setting and participants Postal survey of all specialists in emergency medicine, geriatric medicine, intensive care, medical oncology, palliative medicine, renal medicine and respiratory medicine on the AMPCo Direct database in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. Survey initially posted to participants on 18 July 2012 and closed on 31 January 2013. Main outcome measures Medical specialists’ levels of knowledge about the law, based on their responses to two survey questions. Results Overall response rate was 32%. For the seven statements contained in the two questions about the law, the mean knowledge score was 3.26 out of 7. State and specialty were the strongest predictors of legal knowledge. Conclusions Among doctors who practise in the end-of-life field, there are some significant knowledge gaps about the law on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack decision-making capacity. Significant consequences for both patients and doctors can flow from a failure to comply with the law. Steps should be taken to improve doctors’ legal knowledge in this area and to harmonise the law across Australia.

Evaluation of legal capacity by doctors and lawyers : the need for collaborative assessment

• Balancing the interests of individual autonomy and protection is an escalating challenge confronting an ageing Australian society. • One way this is manifested is in the current ad hoc and unsatisfactory way that capacity is assessed in the context of wills, enduring powers of attorney and advance health directives. • The absence of nationally accepted assessment guidelines results in terminological and methodological miscommunication and misunderstanding between legal and medical professionals. • Expectations between legal and medical professionals can be clarified to provide satisfactory capacity assessments based upon the development of a sound assessment paradigm

Editorials: A different kind of treatment

Health professionals' duty of care includes combating racism in society as well as in health care settings. The Australian Government's proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and the repeal of section 18C has transfixed national debates on legally defining racial discrimination.1 Under these changes, racial discrimination would no longer include acts that “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” a person based on the person's race, colour or national or ethnic origin and instead be limited to acts that “incite hatred” or “cause fear of physical harm”.2 These proposed changes have been framed in the context of enabling “free speech”, yet, evidence presented in this issue of the Journal shows that they have potential to cause harm. In this issue, Kelaher and colleagues highlight the prevalence of racism as experienced by Indigenous Australians and its deleterious effects on mental health.3 Alarmingly, almost every Aboriginal Victorian participating in this study reported an experience of racism in the preceding 12 months, which included jokes, stereotypes, verbal abuse and exclusionary practices. The experiences of racism reported here neither incited hatred nor caused fear of physical harm, yet resulted in harm such as psychological distress, especially when meted out in our health care system. These findings are a stark reminder that racism is indeed an important health issue, and as health professionals, our duty of care extends to contributing to these broader policy discussions...