The use of medical imaging is on the rise and with that the potential risk for safety of the patient (Fazel et al, 2009). The relevance of these concerns can be gauged from reports of patient exposure to excessive radiation doses in medical imaging tests, like computed tomography (CT) scans. In essence the blame for the exposure to excessive radiations, posing the risk for radiation cancer, stems from too frequent use of medical imaging on the same patient and improper handling of the medical imaging machines (Louis, 2009). It is against this background that it becomes important for the Medical Imaging Technologists (MIT) to be fully aware of the legislations and laws of the land that govern the use of medical imaging, to ensure that they do not transgress these legislations and laws and find themselves facing legal action.
The Radiation Safety Act 1999 was put in place with the main objective of protecting individuals and the environment from the hazards associated with certain sources of radiation and harmful non-ionization radiation. This focus of the Act is the reason for choosing it. The Act makes it mandatory for people to be protected from exposure to ionizing radiation unless it is deemed essential, through the three processes of justification, limitation and optimisation. The process of justification calls for the evaluation of the benefits to risk involved in the radiation practice, so that exposure is used only when the benefits outweigh the risks. The process of limitation has implications for minimising radiation dose exposure or employing techniques to achieve exposure to radiation that is below the acceptable levels and thereby minimize the health risks posed to the patient. The process of optimisation requires minimizing the health risks to individuals through the lesser degree of exposure to radiation, by ensuring the optimal use of medical imaging (Government of