We thank Dr Yik Keng Yeong for his letter (Defensive medicine is not the way to go; Nov 21).
Contrary to what the letter writer states, the Court of Three Judges upheld Dr Jen Shek Wei's conviction by the disciplinary tribunal of the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) in respect of his decision to remove the patient's ovarian mass without informing her.
He also failed to carry out further evaluations and investigations of the patient's condition when these were required.
The SMC disagrees that the court's decision would encourage defensive medicine, as suggested by Dr Yik.
Defensive medicine implies needless medicine, for example, excessive investigations which are not useful.
It was far from a defensive practice in this patient's case.
The reasons why such evaluations and investigations were necessary include the patient's presentation, medical and fertility status, the important reference to the widely accepted risk of malignancy index and Dr Jen's prescribed medications for the patient's infertility, causing excessive response in her ovaries.
Furthermore, Dr Jen removed the mass without properly seeking the patient's consent and giving a proper explanation.
"Good clinical acumen" would necessitate further evaluations and investigations, as indicated in the patient's case, before advising and seeking the consent of the patient to remove the mass surgically, which Dr Jen failed to do.
Frances Kong (Ms)
Deputy Head, Corporate Communications
Singapore Medical Council