Consultation Opportunity


Advertising Bylaws

The Council of the College has approved amendments to its advertising bylaws in principle for the purpose of consultation.

The Council directed that the proposed bylaws be circulated to physicians and placed on the website to seek feedback. The Council will consider the feedback it receives when it considers whether to amend the existing bylaws, and if so, what those amendments will be, at its September meeting.

The existing bylaw is badly out of date and addresses issues such as office signs and business cards. The bylaw has been in its current form since at least 1996.

The committee which reviewed the existing bylaw and provided recommendations to Council reviewed the bylaws and policies from each of the other Canadian Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons to assist it from its work.

Much of what it recommended and was accepted by the Council was taken from the advertising standards of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta (CPSA). Other statements were taken from the College of Physicians and Ontario (CPSO) policy and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia (CPSBC) policy.

Background

Some of the more significant changes from the current bylaws, bylaws 27.1 to 32.1 available at the College website, are:

  1. 1. The proposed amended advertising bylaw sets out the general expectations of what is to be achieved by an advertising bylaw before stating what is prohibited. The statement is taken from the CPSA standard.
  2.  
  3. 2. The proposed amended advertising bylaw states that the bylaw applies to advertising done by others on the physician’s behalf. The wording in the draft bylaw is based upon the CPSA standard.
  4.  
  5. 3. The proposed amended advertising bylaw’s definition for what constitutes advertising is based upon the CPSA standard.
  6.  
  7. 4. The proposed amended advertising bylaw specifically addresses testimonials. While the provisions do not copy the specific provisions of any other policy, the draft bylaw requires that there can be no inducement provided to the person who makes the testimonial, that the physician must believe that the statements in the testimonial are accurate and that the individual providing the testimonial must have provided full and informed consent to the use of the testimonial.
  8.  
  9. 5. The proposed amended advertising bylaw adopts the CPSO restrictions on use of photographs.
  10.  
  11. 6. The proposed amended advertising bylaw prohibits advertising that deprecates another member or clinic as to service, ability or fees unless the physician has first substantiated the accuracy of the information to the satisfaction of the Registrar based on publicly-available information.
  12.  
  13. 7. The proposed amended advertising bylaw states that physicians are required to respond to the Registrar and provide information in relation to advertising. That is adopted from the CPSA standard.
  14.  
  15. 8. The proposed amended advertising bylaw states that physicians should not advertise in a way that refers to specific drugs, appliances or treatments. That is adopted from the CPSO policy.
  16.  
  17. 9. The proposed amended advertising bylaw contains a prohibition against advertising services provided by others or facilities operated by others. That is adopted from the CPSO policy.
  18.  
  19. 10. The proposed amended advertising bylaw prohibits specific activities which offer an inducement for patients who seek medical services. That is adopted from the CPSA standard.
  20.  
  21. 11. The proposed amended advertising bylaw includes a requirement to advise patients if advertised services are not covered by the public system. That is adopted from the CPSBC policy.
  22.  
  23. 12. The proposed amended advertising bylaw includes specific requirements for physicians to advertise having a special interest in a particular field of medicine. That is adopted from the CPSA standard. 



Click here for draft version containing proposed amendments. 

 

Consultation Request

The Council anticipates that it will consider feedback from stakeholders, including members of the profession, at its meeting on September 30 and October 1, 2022.  The Council would like to hear from you! 

If you have concerns with the proposed policy, it would be helpful if you explain the reasons for those concerns
.
 

 

How to Respond 

In order for the College to consider feedback and correlate feedback for the Council in time for the next Council meeting, all feedback should be provided to the College no later than Friday, September 9, 2022.

Please complete the survey linked below. Feedback can also be provided to communications@cps.sk.ca.

 

MEDICAL ASSISTANCE IN DYING – Draft Policy for Saskatchewan

 

Background

The Canadian Government has adopted legislation to regulate medical assistance in dying (MAID). That legislation authorized Canadian physicians, and nurse practitioners in some provinces, to assess whether patients meet the requirements for medical assistance in dying and, if they do, to either administer the pharmaceutical agents that will cause the patient’s death, or prescribe pharmaceutical agents that will cause the patient’s death.

While the legislation established a number of requirements for medical assistance in dying to occur, some details are not addressed in the legislation. That is left for the provinces or regulatory bodies to address.

The Government of Saskatchewan established a provincial working group with broad representation from a number of groups to assist in developing appropriate standards for physicians and nurse practitioners who deal with medical assistance in dying.

At its September, 2016 meeting, the Council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan adopted a policy that addressed medical assistance in dying which was provided in hospitals or similar settings. That policy described the requirements that physicians must meet to comply with Canadian legislation and established standards for the administration of pharmaceutical agents that are intended to cause the patient’s death.

The provincial working group subsequently provided recommendations related to patient self-administration. The Council of the College met on January 20, 2017 and approved those recommendations in principle for the purpose of consulting physicians and the public. The Council will consider responses to this consultation request at its meeting on March 25 and expects to adopt a final policy on that date.

 

Subject of Consultation

The Council of the College seeks your input specifically on the recommendations related to patient self-administration as outlined below.

 

Summary of the recommendations from the provincial working group

The working group addressed two primary issues:

1. Should a physician who prescribes the pharmaceutical agents that are intended to cause the patient’s death be required to be immediately available to complete administration by intravenous agents if something goes wrong with the patient’s self-administration?

2. Should there be a process which approves physicians who wish to participate in medical assistance in dying? If so, who should do that and what should be the process?


The Council agreed with the working committee’s recommendations when it approved in principle the redraft of the College policy. The draft of the College’s Medical Assistance in Dying Policy states that:

1. A physician who prescribes pharmaceutical agents for self-administration should receive those pharmaceutical agents from a pharmacy and personally deliver the pharmaceutical agents to the patient at a time that the patient and the physician agree the patient will self-administer. The physician should be required to be immediately available, with the pharmaceutical agents and equipment necessary to administer medical assistance in dying by intravenous means if patient self-administration fails.

2. A physician who will assess a patient to determine whether the patient meets the criteria to receive medical assistance in dying or who prescribes or administers the pharmaceutical agents to cause the patient’s death must be approved by the College to do so if the medical assistance in dying will occur in a place that is not a Regional Health Authority Facility.


The Council was aware that both issues are controversial and that individuals have expressed inconsistent positions on these two issues. The Council’s perspective in approving in principle the policy is that:

1. We currently do not have sufficient information to know what risks exist that a patient may not be able to complete self-administration of pharmaceutical agents to cause death. There are reports of patients who have been unable to complete swallowing pharmaceutical agents or who have vomited after partially consuming the pharmaceutical agents. If no physician is present to complete medical assistance in dying in such circumstances, the consequences may be catastrophic for the patient and the patient’s family.

2. This is an issue to be revisited when better information is available, which should be not more than one year after a policy is adopted, to determine if there should be changes to the policy. Such a review should be based upon the best available evidence of the experience with patient self-administration. That review should also consider whether the requirement that a physician be available is a barrier to patient access to medical assistance in dying.

3. The College currently has a requirement that physicians cannot change their scope of practice without approval from the College. Assessing patients for eligibility for medical assistance in dying is a change of a physician’s scope of practice. The College expects that in situations where Regional Health Authorities have approved physicians to assess patients for eligibility for medical assistance in dying, or have approved physicians to administer medical assistance in dying, that approval will be sufficient for the College to approve the change in scope of practice.

 

Related Documents


Provincial Committee Report
Redrafted Policy - Medical Assistance in Dying  (complete version)



How to Respond 

You may provide your response by following the link below, or send an e-mail to communications@cps.sk.ca.  

Council will review and consider all responses at its regular meeting on March 24-25, 2017.

Deadline for responses: March 8, 201