The ongoing public debate about allowing Dr Vishwamintra Persaud to practise medicine in Guyana is one that is a clear sign of the moral compass of this nation. There are a lot of people in Guyana who see no problem with Dr Persaud practising medicine locally.
This is where moral judgement and clarity become an issue. The facts are clear. The New York Medical Council revoked Dr Persaud’s licence following his confession to a sexual crime against a minor. That decision would reflect not just the simple majority opinion but the overwhelming majority opinion of his peers and also of the people of America. Run a poll after presenting the facts of this case and 95% or more of Americans, or for that matter citizens of any developed country, will agree with the revocation of Dr Persaud’s licence. A substantial percentage of Guyanese differ with the opinions of Americans and the New York Medical Council. That difference is rooted in a fundamental difference in the apprehension of morality and the perception of what constitutes common decency and integrity. In the case of America, its citizens will resoundingly support the NY Medical Council’s decision because its right vs wrong compass is set in a field of the rule of law, justice and inflexibility in respect of moral degeneracy. That is not to say that moral degeneracy does not occur, but it is not allowed to occur widely in circumstances such as these. In Guyana, the moral lines are blurred by several insidious factors.
Firstly, there is what I call the worship syndrome, which stems from widespread ignorance and the culturally reinforced tendency to deify persons with superior academic qualifications. That deification causes the suspension of morality. Because X is a doctor X is untouchable or must be given incredible latitude. The second factor is the deprivation factor. Being deprived of basic amenities for generations, some in Guyana see anyone with the qualifications to help as necessary regardless of their transgressions. The third factor is the watering down of moral standards. Some in Guyana can’t help it, for it is the only standard of morality they know. Plus, with moral degeneracy so commonplace in society the mindset is reframed and the unlawful becomes the lawful. Thus, while a single serious transgression is sufficient in developed nations to deny someone their licence, it requires a multitude of similar egregious practices with very public consequences in Guyana to cause someone to similarly lose their licence. Fourthly, ignorance plays a serious part in moral cloudiness. When people operate within a system lacking rules and know no different they cannot think or contemplate anything different. As such, people will apply Guyana’s standards of morality to this situation and determine that Dr Persaud should be allowed to practise. Fifth, the lack of adequate systems affects moral choices. How is a man who is facing insufficient doctors ever going to see a convicted sex felon in the same light as the NY Medical Council? Finally, the issue of race and to a lesser extent class and religion mars morality to the extreme.
These factors hinder the Guyanese people from thinking clearly about moral decisions. The bigger problem lies on the other front of moral degeneracy in this matter: the authorities and powers that be. For there is absolutely no way Dr Persaud should have been allowed to practise medicine in Guyana even if he admitted to a licence suspension and not a revocation. That admission should have triggered some of the nation’s most learned minds sitting on the Medical Council, at the Georgetown Public Hospital and in the Ministry of Health to immediately investigate. As doctors, investigative inquiry is in their blood. A two-year-old child would have investigated further. Within two minutes the evidence which is all over the internet would have been obtained.
Dr Ramsammy worked for decades in the USA in the medical field. Dr Rambarran studied in the USA. The Medical Council of Guyana probably has doctors who have studied in the USA. The GMC, GPC and Ministry of Health have all licensed and hired foreign doctors before. After obtaining the information it received, it was not just reasonable but imperative to investigate Dr Persaud’s reason for suspension with the NY authorities. It would have been a breach of one’s duty to the public not to investigate.
These entities are required by law to protect the public’s interest. The fact that Dr Persaud practised medicine here in Guyana despite the revocation of his licence says the public interest was not protected. It does not matter how many lives he saved. It is what doctors are supposed to do. Hire another doctor and he will save lives. This comes down to a case of convenient morality, bending of the rules and setting standards. If this happened within the same NY Medical Council and the Department of Health many heads would have rolled.
There is a significant percentage of the Guyanese populace who see nothing wrong with allowing a convicted sex offender to practise medicine in Guyana. These people would likely not see any problems with a convicted fraudster running the Ministry of Finance or a disbarred foreign lawyer coming to Guyana and practising. No wonder fly-by-night so-called road builders can come into this country and reap a contract worth billions just like that. What’s next? Will Robert Simels be practising law in Guyana in the future?
Yours faithfully,
M Maxwell
