Here’s an update on a few of the issues AMA Victoria is working on for members, including:

  • AMA Victoria support for adoption of a Zoe’s Law model in Victoria

  • The cost of doing business in private practice

  • Credentialing concerns


AMA Victoria support for adoption of a Zoe’s Law model in Victoria

AMA Victoria has written in support of the adoption of a Zoe’s Law equivalent in Victoria.

The advocacy relates to situations where the loss of a pregnancy occurs as a result of a criminal act. At present in Victoria, these matters are treated in law only as harm to the mother. New South Wales has separate provisions recognising foetal death in these circumstances.

In our correspondence, we noted that our members see firsthand the profound impact these events have on patients and families. We also noted that many families experience this not simply as an injury, but as the sudden loss of a child who was expected and already part of their family’s future.

AMA Victoria’s position is that any reform would need to be carefully drafted to protect lawful medical care and avoid unintended consequences for clinicians or patients. We noted that the New South Wales framework demonstrates that this can be done.

With appropriate safeguards in place, we consider there is a strong case for the law to better recognise these losses and the reality experienced by affected families.

 

The cost of doing business in private practice

While cost pressures are being felt widely across the profession and the broader community at present, members are raising increasing concern regarding the cumulative impact of taxes, levies and operating costs on private practice in Victoria.

We continue to hear from members regarding rising land tax, the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund (ESVF), payroll tax, insurance, staffing, utilities, and broader regulatory and administrative costs.

At a recent meeting of AMA Victoria’s Private Practice Specialist Policy Council, concerns were also raised regarding the congestion levy and its application to dedicated on-site parking associated with some consulting suites, including within hospital precincts. Members noted the practical oddity that hospitals themselves may be exempt while specialist consulting suites within those same precincts are not.

Many members are running practices and employing staff. They have told us these pressures are affecting decisions regarding staffing, expansion, billing, and service provision, and in some cases are being passed on to patients.

These issues also sit in the background of the current national discussion regarding private specialist fees and affordability.

AMA Victoria is interested in hearing from members about how rising taxes, levies and other practice costs are affecting them and their patients.

Feedback can be sent to Lewis Horton at [email protected] and will inform ongoing advocacy and AMA Victoria’s broader work ahead of the 2026 Victorian election.

 

Credentialing concerns

AMA Victoria is seeking member feedback regarding hospital credentialing processes across both the public and private sectors.

Members continue to raise concerns regarding inconsistent requirements between hospitals, repeated applications across multiple sites, delays, opaque decision making, and increasing administrative burden associated with credentialing and recredentialing processes.

In the private sector particularly, some members have also raised concerns regarding the relationship between credentialing, admission volumes, and access to practice within hospital networks. Members have noted variation between hospitals in how low procedural or admission volumes are treated, and whether commercial or activity-based decisions are clearly separated from questions of practitioner competence, conduct, or patient safety.

Some members have also raised concerns regarding the interaction between credentialing processes, existing practice group structures, and access to private hospital work. In some settings, members perceive that independent practitioners, or practitioners outside established local practice groups, may face greater difficulty obtaining credentialing access, on-call participation, or procedural opportunities. Concerns have also been raised regarding transparency, consistency of decision-making, and the extent to which commercial, referral, or network considerations may influence credentialing or rostering processes

For us, the central issue is that credentialing should support patient safety and appropriate clinical governance without becoming unnecessarily opaque, duplicative, or disconnected from those objectives.

We are interested in hearing from members regarding experiences or concerns relating to credentialing processes, including issues relating to transparency, consistency, governance, or access.

Members wishing to provide feedback can contact [email protected].