There were a number of people
last week, who for good and bad reasons, made me stop and think. Some of the people, and some of the situations they were in, had both ‘good’ and ‘bad’ aspects. For example, on the bad side of the ledger, there was Boris Johnson’s demand for an extra £100
million a week for the NHS, and the suggestion that we should build a bridge
between the UK and France. Some might have found these suggestions
vaguely funny. I didn't. And I didn't think there was anything funny about Theresa May’s use of the term
‘child pornography’ when she spoke in Davos last week. Possibly drawing on a well-intentioned
perspective, she called on social media organisations to take
more proactive action over their platforms being used to promote terrorism and ‘child
pornography’. Of course, most of us would think that is a good thing.
However it is never ‘child
pornography’, it is always child sex abuse*.
In another mixture of good and
bad, I read the story of Larry Nassar, the disgraced US gymnastics team doctor who
received his sentence (175 year imprisonment) for his abuse of female
athletes in his care. He was already serving a 60 year sentence for his sexual
abuse of 7 girls. Last week he attended a sentencing hearing, at which a further
156 girls and women came forward to speak about the abuse they had suffered
under the guise of Nassar giving them medical treatment. The ‘good’ element in this story
was the judge, Rosemarie Aquilina. She allowed each of these witnesses time to
talk about the impact the abuse had on their lives and their wellbeing. The extracts
shown on television made for hard viewing, and I cannot imagine what it would
have been like to actually been in the courtroom.
A number of the young women asked
Nassar’s for an apology, which he did, albeit in way that appeared grudgingly
and insincere. Some of the young women talked of forgiveness, something I found
incredibly brave to do. In another story last week, which also involved the abuse
of a professional relationship, it would be impossible for the perpetrators victims
to offer forgiveness. All but 2 of victims are now dead. This was the case of
Niels Hoegel, a nurse working in Germany, who is currently serving a life sentence
for killing 2 patients and the attempted murder of 2 more. Last week, he was
back in court, charged with the murder of 97 further patients between 1999 and
2005.
During his original trial he said
he ‘enjoyed’ the feeling of giving his patients a cardiac crisis and then being
able to resuscitate them. Hoegel used a variety of drugs to cause the cardiac
crisis and in resuscitating them. It was these drugs that allowed for toxicological
examinations of some 500 patients and the case notes of hundreds more. The German authorities also
exhumed 134 bodies from 67 cemeteries as they gathered evidence. In shades of
Mid Staffordshire, the German police have said that due to the local health officials
prevaricating over whether to alert the authorities or not, Hoegel could have
been stopped earlier and lives saved.
The last person who caught my
attention last week was Tessa Jowell. I watched in awe, the coverage of her speech to a full house of members in the House of Lords. I thought her speech was powerful, poignant and totally
compelling. At the end of her speech, the entire crowded House of Lords rose to their feet and applauded her. The standing ovation was long lasting and was
almost without precedent. At the end of May last year, Tessa Jowell discovered
she could not speak. A few days later
her doctors diagnosed the problem was a brain tumour, a glioblastoma
multiforme. The prognosis is not very positive. She had the tumour removed 2
weeks later. She is shortly to set off to Germany to receive a new and revolutionary immunology therapy.
Her speech was aimed at raising awareness
of the fact that in the UK, we have the worst survival rates for cancer than anywhere else in Western
Europe. She called for both more international co-operation and greater access
to ‘adaptive trials’. These are clinical trials that allow a person to try more than one treatment if
one doesn’t appear to be working. And they can do so even if they have not completed their first
trial. This approach to research is both good and bad. In those where the cancer
clock is ticking it is perhaps not surprising that people might want to try all available
treatments, whether proven and approved or not. The down side is that such
approaches breach the safeguards in place in developing new drugs, which are
there to protect us all from ‘snake oil’ remedies and unrealistic expectations.
Tessa’s speech was also rich in
emotional narrative. She drew on the Irish poet and Noble prize winner, Seamus
Heaney, who just before he died sent the words ‘Noli timere’ (Latin for: do not be
afraid) by text to his wife Marie. In her speech, Tessa said she ‘wasn’t afraid’, and ‘in the
end, what gives a life meaning is not only how it is loved, but how it draws to
a close’. She said her hope was that the debate she had started with her speech would
provide hope for other cancer patients, ‘so that we can live well with cancer,
not just be dying of it. All of us. For longer’. Which would be a good thing.
*If you have been affected
by sex abuse (current or historic) the BBC have collated information and sources of support for children, young people, and concerned parents.
No comments:
Post a Comment