Statement of Principles concerning anal fissure No. 248 of 1995

Overview

The Statement of Principles concerning Anal Fissure (Instrument No. 248 of 1995) was enacted to provide a framework for determining the connection between anal fissure and eligible war service or defence service rendered by veterans and members of the Australian Defence Force. This legislative instrument was made under subsection 196B(3) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, which empowers the Repatriation Medical Authority to establish criteria for linking specific medical conditions to service. The objective of this statement is to outline the conditions under which anal fissure can be considered related to service, ensuring that veterans and Defence personnel can receive appropriate entitlements and support. The Repatriation Medical Authority, in making this determination, relied on the available medical-scientific evidence to establish a probable connection between anal fissure and service factors such as undergoing anal surgery, experiencing trauma to the perineum, being infected with HIV, or suffering from certain gastrointestinal conditions before the onset of anal fissure.

Scope and Application

This legislative instrument, made under section 196B(3) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, pertains to the Statement of Principles concerning anal fissure. The Act applies to veterans and members of the Australian Defence Force who have rendered service other than operational or hazardous service, and who suffer from anal fissure or have died from anal fissure. The legislation outlines specific conditions that must be met for a connection between anal fissure and service to be established, including undergoing anal surgery, suffering trauma to the perineum, being infected with HIV, suffering from Crohn's disease, constipation, or ulcerative colitis, or experiencing an inability to obtain appropriate clinical management for the condition. The principles are applicable nationwide and are subject to amendments through subordinate instruments as evidenced by Instrument No. 12 of 1997 which amended the definitions and certain provisions of the original instrument.

Key Provisions

The Statement of Principles concerning anal fissure (Instrument No. 248 of 1995) as amended, establishes the criteria under which anal fissure and death from anal fissure can be related to eligible war service or defence service. According to section 1 of the Statement, at least one of the specified factors must exist before it can be said that anal fissure or death from anal fissure is connected with the circumstances of the service rendered (section 1). The factors include undergoing anal surgery immediately before the clinical onset of anal fissure, suffering trauma to the perineum, being infected with HIV, suffering Crohn's disease, suffering constipation, suffering from ulcerative colitis, or being unable to obtain appropriate clinical management for the anal fissure (section 1(a)-(g)). The obligations imposed on the parties by the Act require that at least one of the specified factors must be related to any service rendered by a person. For instance, if a veteran or member of the Forces developed an anal fissure before their service, they must demonstrate that the service caused or contributed to the condition (section 2). Additionally, the factor related to inability to obtain appropriate clinical management must be considered in the context of the service and must be a relationship outlined in specific sections of the Act (section 3). There are no explicit offences, penalties, or civil/criminal consequences for breach outlined in the Statement of Principles concerning anal fissure. The primary focus of the Statement is to establish the criteria for connecting anal fissure or death from anal fissure to service, thereby enabling eligible individuals to claim benefits under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. The Statement ensures that claims are substantiated by sound medical-scientific evidence, and any failure to meet the outlined criteria would simply mean that the claim would not be substantiated, rather than resulting in penalties or legal consequences.