Creating a monster

April 10, 2007

Dear Sir,

It truly doth amaze me that there is so much organised opposition to the closing of The Medical Clinic at the King Edward VII Memorial Hospital. I am sure that the protestors have no idea of the origin of this Clinic and the driving force behind its establishment. I was there at its inception. I saw it then as an ill-conceived plan by a group of white doctors, members of the hospital staff, who devised it as a way of keeping poor coloured patients out of their private offices, under the patronising guise of "providing health care for people who could not afford to pay".

The year was 1967, when racism was flourishing in Bermuda. I attended the initial meeting of the KEMH staff that was called to discuss the formation of an Indigent Clinic. Staff members had been asked for their comments. My comments took the form of a written statement, which pointed out, in very certain terms, my reasons for objecting to the formation of such a Clinic. I was alone in my objection. I soon found out that this was not a meeting to discuss whether or not such a clinic should be formed, the decision had already been made, and there was no room for discussion. The Clinic would be in operation for two mornings a week; and it would be staffed by doctors on a list, which would be published periodically. Patients would get a different doctor at each visit. Therefore, there would be no continuity of care for these patients.

My written statement pointed out the several reasons why I opposed the formation of such a Clinic. No evidence was produced to indicate the need for the Clinic. No evidence was produced to indicate that there were people who were being deprived of medical care because of inability to pay. No statistics were available, simply because no study had been done. Not even any anecdotal evidence was presented. It was a forgone conclusion to establish the Clinic. I pointed out that, if in fact there was a proven need, it was the responsibility of Government, and not of the doctors on the hospital staff, to arrange for care of such patients. I also noted that it was already the tradition in the medical profession at that time to provide care for patients regardless of their ability to pay. I offered alternatives for delivery of care of so-called "needy" patients.

I described the formation of such a clinic as "the birth of a monster", which would grow up and become out of control. Coloured patients would be herded into one location and would receive inferior medical care. I also pointed out that there is no such thing as FREE care - somebody pays! And in this case it would well turn out to be the taxpayers.

The late Dr. T.S. Outerbridge was elected Chairman of the fledging Indigent Clinic. I gave notice that I would not be participating in such a Clinic, but I was willing to see assigned patients in my private office on an appointment basis as I see all my patients. Dr. Fulton of St. Georges and Dr. Nash of Somerset were exempted from service on the roster because of the distance they would have to travel. For my express attention was a statement, "Conscientious objectors will not be tolerated!" It is interesting to note that Dr. Ross, a coloured physician, who also practised out of Somerset, was not exempted. I never participated in The Indigent Clinic, and, as a result, I was ostracised and victimised in many ways.

Nine years after its formation, there was a review of the status of the Indigent Clinic. Should it be continued? There had been thoughts of closing it down, but no one had the guts to do it. It was an expensive operation; and there was evidence of much abuse in its usage. Curiously, I was invited at that time to give an opinion. I said something like this, "Nine years later the monster has grown, and is well out of control!" However I advised that it was not too late to terminate the operation. And I presented again alternatives for care of properly identified patients. But, in spite of all the facts presented at that time - the expense of the operation and the abuse of the system - no one else was prepared to do what had to be done. Please note now that I am aware that there are some white people who use the Clinic also!

Some time later (in the mid to late eighties) there was the "cosmetic" suggestion of changing the name. Sounds familiar? if you have a problem with an entity, change the name, do not find and employ solutions. It was said then that we should not stigmatize people by labelling them as "Indigent" - it was so "undignified" - and we should drop the "I" word and call it "The Medical Clinic"! Magic! But the "melody" lingers on.

And now, forty years later, along comes the present Premier, Dr. the Honourable Ewart Brown, who has the courage and the insight to do what should have been done many years ago. He gave notice in the Throne Speech last year that The Medical Clinic would be closed! And he has received nothing but flak for his action. Protests are coming from the strangest places. There are the white protestors, including employees at the Clinic (vested interest?) along with their black allies, who are condemning this closure of The Medical Clinic as an act of depriving these poor people of medical care - of this "one-stop" operation, that provides medical care under one roof. And they are marching on Cabinet! Tell me now, what about the MAJORITY of our population who do not have access to this "one-stop" operation? Does this mean that they are receiving inferior medical care? Should they be marching on Cabinet also and asking for this magical "one-stop" operation?

You know, there are very subtle things about racism and politics - the patronising attitude of the practitioners, who go about standing up for the rights of the underprivileged, the politicians who seize opportunities wherever they seem to exist to promote their aims. And the really unfortunate thing is that they are not aware of the dynamics of their actions. When are they going to drop that façade of the do-gooders and look at the issues objectively? Who cannot see the indignity of targeting a segment of the population and putting them "on show" in the public eye in a nice new Clinic, "where they can get everything done under one roof"? What is wrong with integrating these "less fortunate people than ourselves" into our private medical care system, which is enjoyed by the vast majority of the people? This would be a much better utilisation of funds. And what price can we put on the dignity of the human spirit? And there are people who are saying that it is only Dr. Brown who sees "indignity" in this operation! What an observation! Pity.

The Medical Clinic (still commonly referred to after 40 years as The Indigent Clinic) is a product of an evil concept; and, in my opinion, it should have been disbanded a long time ago! In fact, it is still my firm belief that it should never have started! "The Monster" is out of control. I am not one who usually goes public; my late wife The Hon. Gloria Darrell McPhee, OBE was the firebrand in the family. When she was given the portfolio of Member (later called Minister) for Health and Welfare in 1968 (as the first and only female in Cabinet for more than ten years), she quite promptly changed the name to Health and Social Services for the reason that she did not wish to develop a welfare state. She did not wish to promote or encourage that mentality. From all of the protests that I have heard in connection with the Clinic closure, it seems that there are many who believe in a welfare state. I urge the protestors to take a serious look inward and discover that elusive quality of the human spirit, where dignity resides.

G.B. McPhee, M.D.

Flatts

Writer was mis-informed

April 2, 2007

Dear Sir,

In response to a letter headed "The irony of it all" in the March 29 edition of your newspaper, I would like to draw your readers' attention to the fact that the first editor of the Bermuda Gazette, of which The Royal Gazette is heir, was an ardent abolitionist, as were his daughters who assumed the role of editors on his death. According to historian H. C. Wilkinson: "Since 1784 Joseph Stockdale had systematically printed everything he could (against slavery), advancing the cause of the unfortunate slaves. He also sold pamphlets of legal decisions or outstanding sermons in their favour." (Bermuda from Sail to Steam vol.1 p 208-9).

The author of the above-mentioned letter wrote: "Isn't it ironic that — The Royal Gazette has yet to publicly apologise for being a vehicle of information and misinformation to the slave trade through the print media since 1828". I would argue that the writer is mis-informed about the role of the print media in the abolitionists' cause, and that The Royal Gazette's present anti-slavery campaign is, in fact, in keeping with its role as advocate of justice in a democracy.

INFORMED

Hamilton Parish

P.s. I'm sure I read somewhere the Stockdales were members of the Society of Friends (Quakers) but haven't been able to confirm this.

McCarthy days are back

April 3, 2007

Dear Sir,

I would like the government to formally address whether it supports Derrick Burgess' stance that expats should not "get involved" in Bermudian politics. At this point it is unclear whether this is the Government's official position. As an Island we deserve to know the status and place of our second-class residents so that we can act as good citizens in case they step out of line. Perhaps government could set up a hotline dedicated to anonymous tips about expats becoming political. Oh, the good ol' McCarthy days are here again!

Of course, we'd also have to charge Bermudians that empower expats to become political, and also any that accept non-Bermudian assistance to further their own politics. My first tip would be on Doctor Premier. He's quite proud of having received substantial political donations from people overseas. He's even flown in entertainment on a private jet so that foreign donors can be entertained between rounds of golf with him. (I hope the Americans weren't disappointed with the C-list duo of Ashford and Simpson.) Surely this is unacceptable to Derrick Burgess.

As long as expats are paying taxes, they are enabling this Government to do whatever it does. Certainly they should not have to stand in silent complicity. If the official government position is that expats should not "get involved", then we must stop collecting payroll tax and social security payments from them. My rough calculation (thirteen percent of 10,000 ex-pats earning the average income of $70,000 per year) is a measly $91 million dollars. What could $91 million buy? How many geared-to-income homes? How many trips to the doctor for indigent people? How many World Cup cricket campaigns? I don't know, and I won't be asking any ex-pats for the answer.

DUSTY LAMB

Pembroke

Plundering of our planet

March 30, 2007

Dear Sir,

What about the children! "It's 3.23 in the morning and I'm awake because my great great grandchildren won't let me sleep — my great-great-grandchildren ask me in dreams — what did you do while the planet was plundered? What did you do when the earth was unravelling? What did you do once you knew?" I quote an excerpt from a powerful poem written by a poet for social justice, Drew Dellinger. My piece of the planet is being plundered and this is evidenced by the recently published, shocking graphic "before and after" of the proposed Southlands development. The least I can do for our great great grandchildren is speak up and say to the developers and those in power, "at the very least follow due process and at best exercise a modicum of common sense. Please."

DEBORAH L. JACKSON

Warwick

Bushwacked was right

March 22, 2007

Dear Sir,

Re: Bushwhacked. I could not agree more with the sentiments expressed by Bushwhacked on page 4 of The Royal Gazette, March 21, 2007. The memorandum put forth by works and engineering has several offensive terms. "Queen's Bottom" I find offensive. I respect the Queen too much to refer to the foreshore, as the Queen's Bottom.

Further the anachronistic laws/caveats/policies were written or implemented by politicians, in the days of rigid segregation, and legally enforced deprivation and I certainly had no input into them as none of the politicians of the Colonial period, in question represented me. Bushwhacked refers to the issue at hand as "unjust", and I would add Taxation without Representation, and downright stupid. Further to prove something was present 60 years ago by aerial photography is by and large untenable. To get affidavits from someone, still alive after 60 years is unrealistic.

In almost all circumstances it is the Government's job to prove you guilty of an offence, yet the onus in this matter is upon you to prove the "Queen's Bottom" with suck-rocks, warts, and foreshore erosion was not encroached 60 years ago. How asinine can you get. All owners of waterfront, should institute a class-action suit against a very unjust, fine or tax, and barring a satisfactory solution, consider a modern "Boston tea party".

NAME WITHHELD BECAUSE OF CURRENT RETRIBUTION POLICIES

City of Hamilton

Think about the majority

March 26, 2007

Dear Sir,

What is this PLP Government doing with all the taxes we pay them. They do not ask us if we mind if they give Millions of OUR money to football or cricket entertainment. They make it sound like it's the Government doing this thing. They must realise it's our money and should ask the people would they like to donate so much to sports. These taxes are paid out to things that help everyone. If people who have money want help sports have them donate money they can spare. Nobody asks the public if they could do it, they did it anyway. There are hard working Bermudians struggling to pay rent and food on $500 — $600 a week and they give away millions for sports!

You PLP members have your big cars, big houses, trips every where for stupid little things the Salvation Army building looks like a broken down "chicken coop", I would not put animals in it. I have seen it, no help there! There are seniors who have to pay high rents, some choose to wonder if it should be food or medicine and these people made Bermuda today, and you reap the benefits with high taxes high rents no control. Turn over a new leaf and think about the majority who do not have an easy time.

A JUST BERMUDA

Devonshire

Unhappy with bar patrons

Dear Sir,

Every Saturday and Sunday night the patrons/club member (drunks) of "Splash" nightclub on Bermudiana Road go there to have fun. The problem is they are still having "fun" until 5 a.m. the following mornings when they make their many loud and separate departures. Their cars are parked along Bermudiana Road, Gorham Road, Woodbourne Avenue and/or in Bank of Bermuda car parks. Those patrons/club members should remember that their noisy, drunken, shouting, laughing, screaming farewells to each other, including slamming car doors and honking of car horns can be heard a long way off. They are breaking the law on several counts. They are being "drunk and disorderly", creating a nuisance and are "disturbing the peace" not to forget "driving under the influence" Woodbourne Avenue is a residential area and we are really, really tired of these broken nights.

SLEEPLESS IN MAYFLOWER

City of Hamilton

Enforce parking laws

March 28, 2007

Dear Sir,

After reading in your newspaper about the amount of unpaid parking tickets, I felt I had to send my views. First and foremost $49,000.00 is a lot of "free parking", and that's what it amounts up to. These "freeloaders" are trying to get off the hook by not paying up. My suggestion is one individual owes for two or more parking tickets, then when they try to leave the island on one of their trips or spending sprees, they should be put on the Stop List and the fine should be paid at the airport, prior to their departure. If they don't pay up then they can't leave the island. Another way is if they haven't paid their parking tickets and they go to license and insure their car, if the parking tickets aren't paid then they can't license their car, nor drive it.

If one should go to the parking lot across the street from the Supermart on Front Street, every day there are cars parked there ALL day, and in most instances no "pay & display" ticket on it either. There is black PT Cruiser that parks there everyday and on Monday I saw a parking ticket given by one of our wardens put on this car, and you would have thought they had learned a lesson, but no, back they were on Tuesday and today Wednesday and no parking voucher showing they had paid for an hour. Incidentally that is the allotted amount of time one is allowed to park there. Also in Front of Arnolds Express on Front Street there are people that park there all day, with no parking voucher displayed. I happen to know that this is also a one hour parking zone.

Why are some people allowed to blatantly get away with this. I decided that the next letter I write to you I will have all of the license numbers of these violators in the letter. I'm keeping an eye on this area and I'm making it my project to see if and when something will be done about these "lawbreakers". Also go to City Hall Car Park, and try to get into a parking bay when someone has parked their CV-R in a bay and because of it's size they take up a bay and a half. We need to get someone in Government maybe our Minister of Transportation to start earning that pay cheque.

MAD GRANNY

Sandys