Physicians struck-off the professional registers during COVID-19 pandemic: is their reinstatement risk-free?

On July 14, 2026, in the course of its examination of a bill concerning healthcare professions, the 12th Social Affairs Committee of the Italian Chamber of Deputies adopted an amendment providing for the reinstatement of physicians removed from the relevant professional registers by the competent medical boards during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The measure was introduced on the grounds that these physicians have breached the rules of the Italian Code of Medical Ethics (ICME) by disseminating vaccine misinformation denying its effectiveness, promoting unsupported therapies, and issuing false certifications. The article highlights three relevant risks arising from this amendment.First, it violates some universally shared principles of clinical ethics as well as the provisions of the ICME in which they are embodied. In doing so, the amendment threatens the role that medical ethics plays in safeguarding the health of both individuals and the wider community. At the same time, it challenges the statutory autonomy of medical boards, which serve as subsidiary state bodies, charged, among other duties, with disciplining registrants. Second, reinstating these physicians would place an unacceptable primacy of politics over science, undermining latter's independence and blurring the distinction between evidence-based medicine (EBM) and misinformation. Third, the reinstatement of these physicians would jeopardise public health by undermining the Italian citizens' trust in medicine.From a moral perspective, this amendment also disrespects the memory of pandemic victims, including hundreds of physicians and nurses who died in service. The article concludes by urging health-care professionals to sustain transparent public dialogue with a view to preserve trust in medicine, warning that its erosion could severely compromise the management of future health crises, and calls on Parliament to reject the amendment in order to prevent political interests from jeopardising public health.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Anesthesia Analgesia and Critical Care
Published
2026-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-026-00468-7
Primary Topic
Healthcare Systems and Challenges
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Physicians struck-off the professional registers during COVID-19 pandemic: is their reinstatement risk-free?

Giovanni Mistraletti, Giuseppe Renato Gristina
Journal of Anesthesia Analgesia and Critical Care
Healthcare Systems and Challenges
article

Physicians struck-off the professional registers during COVID-19 pandemic: is their reinstatement risk-free?

Giovanni Mistraletti, Giuseppe Renato Gristina
article en

Abstract

On July 14, 2026, in the course of its examination of a bill concerning healthcare professions, the 12th Social Affairs Committee of the Italian Chamber of Deputies adopted an amendment providing for the reinstatement of physicians removed from the relevant professional registers by the competent medical boards during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The measure was introduced on the grounds that these physicians have breached the rules of the Italian Code of Medical Ethics (ICME) by disseminating vaccine misinformation denying its effectiveness, promoting unsupported therapies, and issuing false certifications. The article highlights three relevant risks arising from this amendment.First, it violates some universally shared principles of clinical ethics as well as the provisions of the ICME in which they are embodied. In doing so, the amendment threatens the role that medical ethics plays in safeguarding the health of both individuals and the wider community. At the same time, it challenges the statutory autonomy of medical boards, which serve as subsidiary state bodies, charged, among other duties, with disciplining registrants. Second, reinstating these physicians would place an unacceptable primacy of politics over science, undermining latter's independence and blurring the distinction between evidence-based medicine (EBM) and misinformation. Third, the reinstatement of these physicians would jeopardise public health by undermining the Italian citizens' trust in medicine.From a moral perspective, this amendment also disrespects the memory of pandemic victims, including hundreds of physicians and nurses who died in service. The article concludes by urging health-care professionals to sustain transparent public dialogue with a view to preserve trust in medicine, warning that its erosion could severely compromise the management of future health crises, and calls on Parliament to reject the amendment in order to prevent political interests from jeopardising public health.

Journal of Anesthesia Analgesia and Critical CareVol. 6(1)
University of Milan (IT)
Good health and well-being, Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Healthcare Systems and Challenges
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon