Edited sentence: Families were strongly discouraged from visiting their relatives at the home.In one case of a patient that died of tuberculosis, Louden reported being told by an American doctor working at Kalighat that the patient might have lived if she had received some hospital treatment.Louden believed that Mother Teresa and her sisters declined to use their influence and income to finance a properly equipped hospital, instead devoting their efforts to ensure that everyone (regardless of creed) got a good Catholic funeral.Louden described Mother Teresa's policy as one of non-intervention, in which God decides who lives and who dies and people are better off in heaven than in the operating theatre.Mary Louden, who had spent time as a volunteer worker in one of the mission's homes, wrote in May 3 1992 issue of The Guardian that the home at Kalighat consisted of two rooms, each with around 40 patients in stretcher beds, sandwiched between pieces of green plastic and small, scratchy blankets.Patients were left with nothing to do and nowhere to go.Patients wore a knee-length western-style overall that tied at the neck and gapes open at the back, and no underwear was provided.She described the food as nutritionally inadequate and always the same, the water disease ridden, and the volunteers largely unable to speak Bengali.She reported that on admission the patients' heads were shaved, their clothes removed, and any possessions confiscated.This latter point is important, because it suggests that many of the criticisms of Mother Teresa's charity work arise from the wide gulf between her understanding of the purpose of charity and the understandings of her critics, who are mostly from western countries and in many cases atheists