Nixon v. Medical Board of Australia: Why Silence on Ethics Is an Admission of Institutional Bankruptcy
By Dr David Nixon – 7 May 2025
On April 4, I asked the Medical Board of Australia a series of fundamental ethical questions:
Does the Board believe the Nuremberg Code still applies to modern medicine?
Is informed consent now considered subordinate to public health mandates?
Is patient autonomy still valid when clinical judgment diverges from bureaucratic expectation?
I gave them until April 17 to respond. They didn’t.
On April 16, I followed up with a second formal letter. I reaffirmed my ethical position and once again invited the Board to clarify its stance.
Still no answer.
On May 6, the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal issued further directions. The Tribunal has now formally acknowledged my refusal to engage with a process that denies the ethical foundations of medicine. The Medical Board, however, continues to move forward — without ever addressing the ethical questions at the heart of this case.
So today, I sent one more letter — addressed to the Tribunal and copied to the Board — to make that silence a matter of public record.
“This silence speaks volumes. In any just society, such a refusal to engage with the foundational principles of consent and conscience would be considered a form of institutional evasion — and, at worst, moral bankruptcy.”
What Happens When Ethics Are Avoided?
When a regulatory body refuses to engage on matters of consent, autonomy, and medical ethics, it forfeits legitimacy. Not legally — but morally, historically, and publicly.
This is no longer just about registration. It’s about whether a governing body can impose irreversible medical interventions without having to justify the ethical basis for doing so — and whether any doctor who questions that authority must be destroyed.
What Happens Next?
I will not participate in a system that refuses to address its own ethical foundations.
I will not re-engage with a process that punishes doctors for acting on conscience.
And I will not remain silent while informed consent is quietly erased from public health.
Let the record show:
My suspension is not the result of harm, but of dissent.
The Medical Board, when asked to justify its ethical position, said nothing.
That silence is not neutral. It is an admission of institutional bankruptcy.
🔗 All documents referenced in this article are available here:
https://drdavidnixon.com/1/en/topic/nixon-v-medical-council-of-australia
In recognition of the profound harms inflicted — and those yet to be acknowledged,
Dr David Nixon
MB, ChB, FRACGP
If all the “Drs” out there had your sense, sensibility and conscience this whole thing would have been put to bed long ago. Thank you for being a leader and standing for your beliefs, values and what’s right. Bravo, I hope you’re an inspiration to your peers. You most certainly are to me my friend.
Your suspension is a badge of honour, to be sure. A pity it was stuck through your bare skin, and history is being written in your dripping blood :-(.
Thank you so much for standing up, and for remaining standing, despite the terrible cost.