Special Hearings — Health Sector Hearings — 1997-06-18

CHAIRPERSON: Professor sorry, I am going to have to ask you to wind up in two minutes.

UNKNOWN: I would be sad if the Commission was as adept at silencing me as the State has proved to be earlier. I must finish that example for example, otherwise what I've already said would make no sense.
 After reading my preliminary expert report to this effect, and after meeting with a specialist psychiatrist called by the State to assist, a former head of psychiatry at 1 Military Hospital, he began his oral testimony by asserting that despite what he had said in his affidavit made the day after death, he actually hadn't diagnosed schizophrenia as he had said but had actually diagnosed a brief reactive psychosis, a very highly convenient fiction but a very rare diagnosis and not applicable in that case.   The same doctor testified that he had conducted a comprehensive and competent full physical examination of the patient in a small and dark cell in which there were three policemen  who failed somehow to see this occur and with the patient remaining standing and fully clothed throughout the procedure.
 Leaving out many other examples let me move to a close, but I repeat and reiterate my call that we cannot abbreviate the professional discussion of these issues, and there is, as far as I can see no other forum in which this will be allowed or enabled to occur.
 There will be those who complain that our efforts in this section of the TRC's work may damage the national and international reputation of the medical and other health science professions in South Africa and this complaint is of course mischievously false.  The reputation of these professions was massively damaged by the active misconduct of relatively few professionals and the passive acquiesence of a far larger proportion.
 Facing what actually happened and learning from these experiences and striving to prevent their recurrence, and ensuring appropriate professional discipline for those whose conduct was professionally unacceptable is the only way in which our professions can deserve to regain a good reputation.  
 There is no statute of limitation on unprofessional and ethical conduct and no one may be given amnesty for such conduct.  
 If we wish to become genuinely and comprehensively healing professions again, we owe it to the victims, and I occupy the uncomfortable position of being expert and victim, to continue and complete this process of examination, comprehension, reparation and prevention.  These are necessary parts of the healing process and healing does not occur just because it is declared to be desirable.
 I'd like to close with a quote from Albert Kamu(?) who helped towards defining our admission, using the metaphor of a pestilence, a plague to reflect the encounter with oppression, and he wrote eloquently about how a doctor felt compelled to join in a struggle against the plague. The doctor, he wrote did so,
"So that he should not be one of those who hold their piece but should bear witness in favour of these plague-stricken people, so that some memorial of the injustice and outrage done to them might endure, and to state quite simply that what we had learned in the time of that pestilence, that there are more things to admire in men than to despise. He knew that the fate he had to tell could not be one of the final victory, if could only be the record of what had had to be done and what assuredly would have to be done again by all who, while unable to be saints, but refusing to bow down to pestilence, still strive their utmost to be healers."
 Preparing for this testimony I find has stirred up, to a degree to a degree I didn't expect, my own symptoms, but I think, I pray that like the victims I work with, that just as we try every night as I am cross-examined in my sleep, not to allow the wicked people to triumph in the land of our dreams, as they did triumph in the land of our birth.  
 Thank you.

ADV POTGIETER: Thank you very much Professor.  Thank you for that presentation. We do have all of the wealth of information that is contained in your full submission before us, so it's a pity that there are always these time constraints on us in the public work that we do, but we do have that submission, it will form the basis of a lot of our work and you have kindly indicated that we would be free to be in touch with you to get access to a lot of other records that you do have.  We want to thank you very, very much.

WENDY ORR: Professor Simpson I want to add my word of thanks and to say that far from attempting to silence you, what we are trying to do here is give as many people as possible a voice and we perhaps have been over ambitious, but I will most certainly ensure that arrangements are made for follow up interviews with you and for access to your expertise and your information.  This is the beginning of a process, it's not the end.  You have revealed some very important information to us and we know you have more and we will most definitely ensure that that is heard and included in our report.   Thank you very much.

UNKNOWN: Thank you I look forward to our continuing to work together.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Professor Simpson.
PSYSSA  SUBMISSION

CHAIRPERSON: Can I please call Lionel Nicholas and Don Foster.

UNKNOWN: Don was here earlier but he seems to have disappeared, I'll just have to go on without him.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Lionel will you just introduce yourself before I hand over to Hlengiwe Mkhize.

UNKNOWN: I'm Lionel John Nicholas, I'm a professor of psychology at the University of the Western Cape Counselling Centre.

UNKNOWN: (sworn states)

MS MKHIZE: Prof Nicholas I would like you to take us through your presentation and I will ask you a few questions which you might have to give us a written report afterwards, but for the record I would like to ask you a few questions afterwards.