A controversy has erupted over the autopsy of a young female doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital, with junior doctors now being accused of double standards. Initially, five junior doctors were present during the autopsy and had signed off, expressing their satisfaction with the process. However, they later alleged that the autopsy was mishandled, raising questions about their credibility.
The incident dates back to August 9, when the body of the deceased doctor was recovered, and the autopsy was conducted at R.G. Kar. Junior doctors had requested certain conditions for the autopsy, including allowing their representatives to be present. Initially, two postgraduate trainees (PGTs) were to be present, but the number was later increased to four. However, as per new documents, five junior doctors were ultimately allowed to observe the autopsy, and all signed a document expressing satisfaction with the process.
Despite this, last Friday, the autopsy report was leaked, sparking fresh allegations of misconduct. The junior doctors, who had previously expressed satisfaction with the autopsy, began protesting, claiming significant discrepancies in the procedure. This shift in their stance has led to accusations of dishonesty and double standards. Critics, including members of the medical community, are questioning why the junior doctors are now raising concerns after previously agreeing that the autopsy was conducted properly.
The controversy deepened when junior doctors’ spokesperson, Kinjal Nanda, commented on the issue during a press conference on Tuesday. He stated, “Even though our signatures are on the autopsy document, the responsibility for the transparency of the autopsy doesn’t lie with us.” Nanda’s statement has only fueled further controversy, as many are asking why they signed off on the autopsy if they had concerns about its transparency.
In response to Nanda’s statement, various sections of the medical community and the public have raised strong objections. They argue that signing the autopsy document implies approval of the process. If there were any issues with the autopsy, why weren’t they raised at the time? Furthermore, why didn’t they document their objections when signing?
Questions have also arisen regarding the role of the police. On the day of the autopsy, August 9, the then-Police Commissioner of Kolkata, Vineet Goyal, visited R.G. Kar Hospital and offered to provide the autopsy report to the protesting doctors for review. However, the police claim that none of the doctors responded or requested the report at the time.
This shift in the junior doctors’ stance has led many to speculate whether they are using the controversy over the autopsy as a means to further their own interests. It is being suggested that they may have intentionally suppressed information about their presence during the autopsy to manipulate the narrative and gain leverage in their ongoing protests for justice for the deceased doctor, known as “Abhaya.”
The incident has also stirred debates about the junior doctors’ involvement in the hospital’s advisory board, which has further complicated matters. Critics are questioning how the same individuals who were present during the autopsy are now leading protests against it.
As the controversy continues to unfold, the junior doctors have yet to provide clear answers to the allegations. Meanwhile, they have called for a full-scale strike, raising concerns about patient care being affected. Despite the mounting questions, the junior doctors remain focused on justifying their protest while the public waits for a resolution.
In light of these developments, there are calls for the junior doctors to be interrogated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to uncover the truth behind the autopsy and their subsequent actions.