For a better performance

Sir — The Telugu Desam Party’s programme to train active party workers in the art of presenting themselves before the public is quite unique, particularly in the light of the fact that politicians are among the worst-behaved in the country and a constant source of embarrassment to their fellow-countrymen (“Desam grooms leaders to get media-savvy”, Feb 3). But I am not sure if “proper dress and hairstyle to highlight their personality” and “positive thinking, yoga and body language” are the best way of addressing the problem. Nor are these likely to help them connect better with the masses. Conducting oneself properly in public places is partly a matter of education (in the broadest sense of the term) and partly of personality. Indian politicians have always prioritized mudslinging and verbal flourish over the real problems of the people. Since such priorities are fixed by design, “public relations” classes of the TDP kind are unlikely to be much more than a futile exercise.

Yours faithfully,
Bijan Bose, Calcutta

Patient hearing

Sir — The recent ruling of the Calcutta high court judge, Barin Ghosh, is a shot in the arm for the doctors of the city (“Court defence for doctors in the dock”, Jan 21). While it must be admitted that the relatives and friends of the deceased sometimes target attending doctors without reason, it is also true that doctors too are sometimes guilty of bringing about the death of patients under their care through sheer negligence. Refusing admission to critically ill patients is a common practice in government hospitals in the state. The admitted patients often go unattended for hours on end. After much running around do the relatives of the patient manage to get a doctor to attend on the patient. Such tales abound.

Doctors are expected to be more humane and communicative towards the family of their patients. If such doctors are hard to come by, it is no wonder that nurses are indifferent and uncaring, and the rest of the staff working in tandem to make treatment in a government hospital a nightmarish experience. Justice Barin Ghosh’s observations may have been justified given the circumstances in which they were made. But they do not necessarily negate the darker side of things.

Yours faithfully,
S. Ram, Calcutta

Sir — The medical community sincerely thanks Justice Barin Ghosh for understanding the doctors’ dilemma and presenting their case in the correct perspective. Doctors indeed have become extra careful after persistent mudslinging by the media and patients’ relatives, preferring the patients to take a number of pathological tests before spelling out their diagnosis. If there is the slightest room for doubt, they refer the patients to specialists. All this makes the treatment process a huge financial burden on patients and their families, and sometimes result in patients “dropping out”. It has to be kept in mind that nowhere in the world can certain medical or surgical treatment be given with a guarantee of success, despite doctors putting in their best. The people and the media must realize this and re-invest their faith in the doctors.

Yours faithfully,
Arunava Choudhury, Calcutta

Sir — Barin Ghosh must have remarked off the cuff that the petitioner was “indirectly suggesting that the doctor is a murderer”, since death due to medical negligence and murder are not the same things in the eyes of law.

The Indian healthcare system is undergoing a revolution today. Private clinics have grown by leaps and bounds, for people are willing to pay more for better healthcare facilities. Consumer associations are making people more aware of their legal rights in cases of medical negligence and malpractice.

The city’s medical community may have found solace in the honourable judge’s remarks, but the remarks have done nothing to change perceptions. No court directive can possibly instill faith in the healthcare system if the system does not improve.

Yours faithfully,
Amitava Bose, Calcutta

Sir — If too much litigation against doctors in West Bengal is the cause of the declining healthcare system of the state, then nothing can be more shocking for thousands of families who have lost their loved ones to negligent treatment in government hospitals. In India, where malpractices are common and where most victims of medical negligence are too ignorant and poor to fight for their rights, charges of excessive litigation against doctors sound unreal.

Barin Ghosh is right that there are no conceivable “motives” for a doctor to try and kill his patient, who is a virtual stranger to him. But that does not rule out the possibility of negligent discharge of duty. Is the lack of motive enough to absolve a doctor of his responsibility in a patient’s death? A man can be guilty of culpable homicide, with or without a motive.

There is also no logical connection between the current trend to blame doctors and doctors’ insistence on laboratory tests. It is true that doctors now are better-equipped than in the past, when they could only seek the help of a few pathological tests but had to largely diagnose from external symptoms. But many doctors prescribe more laboratory tests than are necessary, not to avoid risks, but to make extra profits.

An inept health department and a medical council which seeks to protect errant doctors rather than taking up the cases of the patients are to blame for the erosion of faith in doctors over the past few years.

Yours faithfully,
Kunal Saha, Columbus, US

Still for the ban

Sir — I am shocked to find my “comments” on Dwikhandita in The Telegraph (“Taslima blames three writers”, Feb 2), as I have never made such comments to this newspaper or to anyone else. The fact is that I have supported Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee’s decision of banning the book. While, generally speaking, I am against the banning of books, I consider this particular case as an exception because, amidst the communally-charged atmosphere of our country today, I think a book like Dwikhandita could have incited graver tensions rather unnecessarily.

Yours faithfully,
Sankha Ghosh, Calcutta