Example 2

"A doctor is described as rude, crude, imperious to colleagues. He is divisive and arrogant. He is widely thought to be motivated primarily by money. He is sometimes indifferent to patients.

"Nursing colleagues tolerate him. 'Everything must be his way. He thinks he's a king.

"His name is not known to the media."

Ms Brock contrasts that doctor with this situation: "A doctor is described as rude, imperious, histrionic, pot-stirring, belittling of colleagues; reduced at least two nurses to tears.

"He is known to be helpful to and caring of patients. He craves attention and drops names of politically influential friends. Nurses mount a petition against him.

"His personal life is sprayed in the media. Everyone knows his name."

She cites another example: "Although credentialed to do thyroidectomy surgeries, an expatriate doctor had not done one in his five years in Bermuda. When he scheduled it, colleagues questioned his ability and considered stopping him from doing it. The operation was a success and uneventful."

And compared it with this: "Although not credentialed to perform radical breast mastectomies and plastic surgery, an expatriate surgeon was scheduled to do so as one of his very first operations in Bermuda. There were no questions. The operation was a success and uneventful."

She related this account: "Before coming to Bermuda, a doctor was controversially married to a girl under the age of consent. They had the consent of her parents. Overseas authorities determined not to prosecute. In Bermuda, the matter is leaked to the media."

And set it against this: "In Bermuda, a doctor sexually assaults a nurse. She is traumatised. Although he will not be permitted to return to work at the hospital, his licence is not revoked. He suffered a heart attack and is quietly airlifted out of Bermuda."

Highlighting another inconsistency, she gave this example: "In the mid-60s when the Indigent Clinic was established, two doctors were exempt from the service rota because they lived at extremities of the Island (St. George's and Somerset). Another doctor was not exempt from the rota for the Indigent Clinic despite the fact that he lived in Somerset."

Summarising the above examples, Ms Brock asked: "Which of these doctors are black; which are white? Who got the benefit of the doubt?"

She added: "These and other examples raise critical questions. If racism can explain a situation, is it necessarily the explanation? Even when there are explanations possible other than race, could an action or situation still be due to racism? Do whites always enjoy the benefit of the doubt? Do blacks ever enjoy the benefit of the doubt?"

Referring to the example of the "pot-stirring" doctor whose personal life was splashed in the press, she said: "Whites and blacks were unanimous that the complaints against the black doctor are about personality, not race.

"Even those who lauded his caring for patients and professional skills were in accord that his condescension toward colleagues is in 'a class of its own'.

"However, several blacks did charge that the administration colluded in a revolt by the nurses against him. The failure of the hospital to insist on adherence to a proper complaints process was cited as part of a pattern of bias against black doctors.

"Some black interviewees questioned how the media obtained confidential information about the black doctor. Several pointed fingers of suspicion at one (white) practitioner's personal connections to the media. The hospital appears reluctant to enquire without proof. The dilemma is that it cannot get proof without questions.

"This issue buttresses black opinion that not only white colleagues, but hospital administration itself will always — and blithely — give whites the benefit of the doubt.

"The inevitable question is: if the suspected source of the leak were black, would the hospital be as restrained in trying to determine if that person were the source of the leak?"