Medical Ethics is enlightening and educative. I certainly wish to read more of it. ‘Caraka’s Oath of Initiation’ really calls for a doctor of Oliver Sacks’ sensitivity!

The only cautionary note for the future, if I may be allowed to say my piece in the interest of Medical Ethics, is to ensure that this newsletter does not have a crusading-call attitude. The facts presented are valuable by themselves and their surgical delivery will win broad support from a thinking public.

As regards removal of the uterus from mentally handicapped women (Medical Ethics, February-April 1994) Dr. Shirish Sheth and Ms. Vandana Khullar, the professional players associated with this tragedy come out in poor light. If these ‘thinking individuals’ (as against their ‘non-thinking’ patients) had taken a few minutes to reflect upon the realities they would have prevented the thoughtless dehumanisation of these women and salvaged a bit of their own reputations. These professionals could have asked themselves some basic questions:

1. Is menstrual fluid any extraordinary excretion from a woman’s body? Should its management be viewed differently from that of daily urine and faeces?
2. Is removal of the uterus from mentally handicapped women adequate safeguard from harassment from sexually charged/mentally handicapped males?
3. Is the removal of the male organ of mentally handicapped males an equal consideration? Is it my responsibility to sanitise society? I am especially concerned that Ms. Khullar, an I. A. S officer and a senior functionary of the state, should attempt to deflect public attention from shortcomings in the provision of care by a Government institution, using a transparently illogical argument. It is the responsibility of the institution to care for the women entrusted to it. It is not the duty of activists or other concerned individuals to take over these functions.

For many doctors today the business of cutting up the human body to get rid of an organ termed a nuisance has become assembly-line stuff: The thoughtless exertion of the power of decision making over a helpless human being cannot but raise the hackles of any thinking human being.

I wonder whether Forum for Medical Ethics is restricted to the medical profession. If so, it would be a great shame for the topics concerning it are of considerably wider interest. Individuals and groups outside the medical profession can contribute a lot to the debate conducted by the Forum.

(Ms. Dutia has worked for Save the Children Fund and other organisations in India and in Sudan. We take this opportunity to assure her and other readers that the Forum actively seeks participation from anyone concerned about the current standards of medical ethics. We especially welcome those not connected with the medical profession as they will ensure objectivity in our dialogue.)