July 8 to July 10, 2016 - choices of life!

I don’t remember that I ever had to deal with two tragedies in one weekend.

It was a horrific time for two family members.

It is a paradox that while one died for completely avoidable reasons, the other survived.

The uncle who died went to the apex hospital in Bihar and yet couldn’t get very basic evaluations done.

A ‘heart-attack’ patient kept on observation - for 6 days - left to wither away as no one understood the degree of blockage of coronary arteries. The institution kept waiting to fix the angiography facilities. It had been waiting for 6 months as I now understand.

When it happens at an apex tertiary institution of the state - it poses serious questions about the state of public healthcare in Bihar.

Is the public hospital a place where one is brought for passing on the guilt or responsibility of death? 

Is it a place where one is wheeled in to try one’s natural defence systems ? Or, is it a place where one has to be actively healed?

In contrast is an aunt who was wheeled into an expensive private hospital.

She has temporarily survived, although no one really cared for her life. 

What I found appalling was that despite treating appropriately the doctors completely failed in explaining the nuances of treatment to the attendants. This coupled with the underlying mistrust about private healthcare led the patients to believe that my aunt was being over-treated. 

In my meditations, for last two days, I thought about the unwarranted death and the unwanted life!

Isn’t it paradoxical for a patient and its family? That they have to make choices - between saving money at equipment-less institutions and over-priced over-treatment. 

Health shouldn’t be broken like this and we need not make such choices. 

I am struggling with my meditations on:

a. Should health be declared a fundamental right?

b. Should there be a mechanism to ensure consistency and transparency?

c. How can we, the medical fraternity, win trust and respect of our brethren?

d. How can we be more humane?

Designed for Poor, or Poorly Designed ?

This building is a part of Patna Medical College, were I did my internship training. 

Its department of Plastic Surgery serves many patients - daily. 

I was passing by the department today and couldn't stop myself from clicking this photo.

Does this banner look ugly to you? To me - it does! 

In a world where Marketing makes our breaks political campaigns, influences choice of cola among the poorest of poor, success of the world's largest Pulse Polio campaign - I think this poorly designed banner can easily make beneficiaries of PMCH believe that they are opting for poor, low quality services.

Does designed for poor need to be poorly designed as well?

I am not a proponent of expensive marketing material. On the contrary I think you must be selling sugared and coloured water(with some fizz) if you need to run multi-billion dollar advertisement campaigns.

I believe we can increase uptake of public services by making them look elegant. 

At the same time, elegance need not be expensive. 

Simple signage with modern topography can be achieved frugally!

Let us design it better. It matters!

Increased uptake of services can be a consequence ! Who knows :)

Responsible Politics - Financial appraisal systems for Netas!

Can we innovate in the modality of democracy?

Can we somehow learn to make our leaders deliver?

Nothing could be more dastardly for Delhites (I am one!) than the AAP vs BJP confrontation.

When we say India is a rising superpower (I believe in it!), and I look at the grim situation in Delhi - power cuts, poor roads, holy cows on ring road (yes!), water supply at 2 AM (get it or buy it), I am amazed!

When I compare the amenities a common man (I can’t use the term 'aam aadmi' anymore) in Delhi gets with a villager in France/Japan/Australia, I am shamed. I know that I would be immediately given photographs of Delhi Metro. I agree we have made significant progress, but is that not too little, too late!

Clearly, all our choices so far have failed us - and they blame each other. Who loses ?

We, the citizens, do!

What if we mandated the politicians to complete the tasks they have promised. 

And what if their appraisal was not voting them out if they failed but to give them a financial penalty. 
They should return the money tax-payers have spent on them for getting things done.

We after all don’t elect highly paid irresponsible ‘netas’. 

In their own words they want to be ‘responsible’, ‘diligent’ and ‘useful’.

As a nation we can set up new benchmarks of a responsible and accountable democracy.

Any takers ?