The BHU hospital is a beacon of hope for millions in Purvanchal, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Nepal, and other parts of India. Patients flock from these regions seeking medical care, as it’s the largest hospital in the area. Unfortunately, the hospital’s management, staff, and doctors are plagued by corruption and cruelty, lacking basic humanity. Even locals believe BHU offers top-tier medical expertise, but without personal connections, navigating the hospital is an arduous challenge.
Navigating the BHU hospital is an arduous ordeal from registration to treatment, medication, and even claiming rightful subsidies. The process begins with the frustrating task of obtaining a registration number. As there’s no online option, patients must endure long queues, often waiting hours. The next hurdle is consulting a doctor, which involves another lengthy queue and encounters with a corrupt system. Patients with connections can bypass these queues, while others wait patiently.
BHU’s OPD typically operates with one senior doctor and five to six junior doctors. Patients are initially seen by junior doctors, who may consult with the senior doctor if needed. However, preferential treatment is given to those with connections, undermining the system. Diagnostic tests like blood tests, CT scans, and MRIs are often recommended, but accessing these services is another challenge. Despite affordable costs, patients face excessively long wait times, making it nearly impossible to obtain timely tests in emergencies. To avoid delays, many patients opt for private facilities, often at inflated prices, which may also benefit the referring doctor through commissions.
Hospital admission is another major hurdle. While beds are technically available, securing one often requires connections within BHU. Numerous acquaintances have shared experiences of initial denial, followed by immediate admission upon intervention by influential individuals. Patients without such connections are frequently left to endure inhumane conditions, including treatment on the hospital floor due to a scarcity of beds and stretchers. Once admitted, patients are subjected to a complex system of commissions, with BHU staff playing a central role.
Patients and their attendants often face pressure from external pharmacies to purchase medications. These pharmacies offer discounts as an incentive, but these deals are typically less advantageous than the subsidized prices at the hospital pharmacy. To exacerbate this issue, some doctors recommend specific external pharmacies, often due to undisclosed commissions. A recent case involving a neighbor diagnosed with breast cancer exemplifies this problem.
A biopsy confirmed the patient’s cancer had progressed to stage three, necessitating urgent chemotherapy due to the tumor’s size. Disturbingly, the doctor mandated purchasing medication from a specific off-campus pharmacy. This was particularly egregious given the hospital’s AMRIT store, a government initiative offering cancer and heart medications at significantly reduced prices. The scale of the issue is alarming. India records 700,000 new cancer cases annually, with 2.8 million living with the disease and half a million succumbing each year. Breast cancer specifically affects 145,000 Indian women yearly, according to the World Health Organization.
The exorbitant costs of cancer treatment often force over half of patients to discontinue therapy after just two or three cycles. To address this crisis, the government launched the Affordable Medicines and Reliable Implants for Treatment (AMRIT) program. When the patient inquired about the medication’s cost at the doctor-recommended pharmacy, they were quoted an exorbitant Rs. 17-18,000. Given my experience paying around Rs. 5,000 for a similar treatment at Mumbai’s Tata Memorial Hospital, I advised the patient to check the price at the hospital’s AMRIT store.
The patient was astounded to find the same medication priced at a mere Rs. 4000 at the AMRIT store. Coming from a destitute background, they were already seeking government financial aid, but the process was time-consuming, and immediate treatment was crucial. With limited savings, they purchased the medicines from AMRIT but returned to the doctor to verify the prescription, unable to fathom the price discrepancy. The doctor initially approved the medications but unexpectedly requested the purchase receipt.
Upon presenting the AMRIT store receipt, the doctor erupted in anger, berating the patient for disregarding her instructions. The patient explained the significant cost difference and their dire financial situation, emphasizing the impossibility of affording the exorbitant price quoted earlier. Despite the clear financial benefits of the AMRIT purchase, the doctor remained inflexible. In a callous disregard for the patient’s well-being, she discarded the medications and dismissed the patient, effectively ending their treatment.
Overwhelmed by despair, the patient pleaded with the doctor to begin treatment, but their pleas fell on deaf ears. This was not an isolated incident; numerous patients faced identical ordeals. With treatment options dwindling and time running out, we were forced to consider alternatives. The Railway Hospital in Varanasi, although not our first choice due to BHU’s perceived superior facilities, emerged as the only viable option. Upon explaining the situation, the Railway Hospital’s medical staff extended their sympathy and agreed to admit the patient. Their willingness to accept the AMRIT-purchased medication was a beacon of hope in this distressing situation. Even the hospital staff expressed shock at the events.
The patient’s treatment commenced at the Railway Hospital, with chemotherapy medications procured from BHU’s AMRIT store. However, a temporary setback occurred when the Railway Hospital was closed for renovations to align with Tata Memorial Center’s standards. While this disruption to treatment was disheartening, the prospect of improved facilities and care at the revamped hospital offered a glimmer of hope.
Fortunately, all Railway Hospital cases were transferred back to BHU on a government order, resolving the immediate crisis. Subsequent chemotherapy treatments were administered at BHU, where the AMRIT medications were accepted. Reflecting on the ordeal, the doctor’s cruelty in denying treatment due to financial constraints is unconscionable. The underlying motive of profit through medication commissions is a stark indictment of the medical profession. While locals like me have options, the plight of those from distant regions is unimaginable. This systemic failure to prioritize patient care is a grave concern.
A particularly egregious case involved a cardiac patient from Aurangabad, Bihar, admitted to BHU in May 2017. Hailing from a poverty-stricken background, the family had secured government aid of Rs. 1,75,000 for the treatment. Typically, these funds are directly transferred to the hospital or reimbursed against bills from authorized pharmacies. Despite presenting the government approval, the patient was denied treatment. The doctor fabricated excuses and demanded a Rs. 2,50,000 upfront payment to a specific off-campus location.
Desperate to save their loved one, the family mortgaged their agricultural land to raise the demanded Rs. 2,50,000. The surgery itself, performed at BHU, likely incurred minimal costs – I recall paying only Rs. 500 for a heart valve surgery for a cousin about a decade ago. The exorbitant expenses were primarily attributed to medication costs. Post-surgery, the family sought reimbursement by requesting medication receipts from the shop. To their dismay, they received receipts totaling only Rs. 1,80,000, revealing a discrepancy of Rs. 70,000. Outraged by this deception, the family filed a formal complaint with the hospital’s Medical Superintendent.
The Medical Superintendent intervened, demanding the shop owner return the excess Rs. 70,000. Despite an initial agreement, the shop owner reneged on the promise. Adding to the family’s distress, government reimbursement was contingent upon receipts from AMRIT stores – a condition impossible to fulfill due to the doctor’s mandate. This blatant exploitation, driven by the lure of commissions, underscores a deep-rooted malaise within the healthcare system. The suffering inflicted on vulnerable patients is unimaginable.
The family’s financial ruin due to the doctor’s greed is a tragic consequence. This is not an isolated incident but a systemic problem, prevalent in many healthcare institutions across India. While not every doctor is corrupt, the frequency of these cases is alarming. Increased transparency and online systems offer potential solutions, but the journey towards a just healthcare system is likely to be long.
Prime Minister Modi’s efforts to combat corruption are commendable. Initiatives like the AMRIT scheme demonstrate a commitment to improving healthcare accessibility. It is imperative to sustain this momentum and implement stricter measures to hold corrupt medical professionals accountable.
New Paper article
