Moral & Legal Bankruptcy in the Business of Healing

Mr Mann develops pain in his abdomen in the night. He waits till morning. The pain is almost gone but he and his wife remain worried. Now consider the following three scenarios

  Scenario one:  He goes to a surgeon Dr. A.

Even though there is no evidence, the surgeon tells him that he has got appendicitis and if he does not get operated right now, he would die. The surgeon does an urgent operation under general anaesthesia for a very fat fee. He removes the appendix which is of course completely normal. Mr Mann stays in nursing home for a week and after the stiches are out he is allowed to go home after paying a large bill to the nursing home.

    Scenario two: He goes to another surgeon Dr B.

DR.B again does not find any evidence of any serious disease but tells the patient more or less the same things and arranges for an urgent surgery. When the patient is asleep under anaesthesia the surgeon just makes a shallow cut in the skin and then stitches  the skin back. He charges about the same amount of fee. Patient goes home same day.

    Scenario three: The wife is a devotee of a well-known Baba swami. She insisted on consulting him first.

The Baba is very busy but he agrees to see them in the evening. By the time he sees them the patient is fine but Baba plays on the couple’s worry and arranges to remove his appendix by spiritual surgery.  In a room with strong smell of burning incense and in total darkness with chanting of some mantras Baba Swami pretends to remove the burst appendix. In the morning a disciple of Baba advises the couple that before going home they should pay their respect to Baba Swami by donating a kilo of gold in his benefit fund.  

Legally Dr. A can defend himself well. He made an error of judgement but he did what he said will do and got his fee.

Dr. B and Baba Swami both played on the couple’s fear and gullibility. They did not remove his appendix. They did not do what they said would do. Legally they do not have a leg to stand. However some societies do believe in spiritual surgery and Baba Swami will never be called to the court.

As for value for money the patient got worst deal from surgeon A. He did a quite invasive surgery on the patient. Patient had more pain, loss of more working days from his treatment than the other two treatments. He could have got serious complications from his unnecessary surgery and in future he might get further problems.

Dr B. certainly did not do much harm, made only a scar in tummy. But in future this may prove very dangerous for Mr. Mann if he really develops appendicitis. The doctors will not consider appendicitis if he has a history of appendix operation in past with a scar in the right place.

It seems Baba Swami has done least harm to Mr. Mann. Or has he? In future if Mr. Mann or any of his family members really develops a serious medical problem, he may prefer to go to Baba rather than seek medical help. But again with doctors like A & B, Baba Swami may be a better option!

Morally all three are despicable. But if Baba Swami really and insanely believes that he could remove the appendix by spiritual surgery then he is only guilty of greed. Moreover if he denies any knowledge or has not given implicit consent to his disciple’s demand, he can be exonerated of even greed. That is the plea most of the Baba-swamis of this world make and get away both legally and morally. 

After considering these scenarios can you decide who among these three lowlifes is the lowest?