History repeats itself.
There was a patient referred to a hospital by a court for an examination by a gynecologist. It was a case for divorce, in which the husband had claimed that the wife did not have normal external sex organs. The court wanted a gynecologist to examine and state if that was true. That was not true, as was found out by local gynecologist. I wondered how any lawyer would advise a client to seek a divorce on these false grounds, which can be verified easily by a gynecologist. Or perhaps the husband stuck to his claim and the lawyer represented him, just as he/she would represent any client, outcome not guaranteed.
That reminded me of a case that had been referred for the same reason thirty one years ago, when I was a Resident Doctor. It came for hearing when I had become a Lecturer. I stated that the wife was normal. The husband's lawyer said "I charge that you have colluded with the defendant". I put on a bored expression and looked at the clouds in the distance through a window. The judge got irritated by the lawyer and asked me if that was true. I politely said that it was not true. The court seemed to accept my statement about my findings.
I wonder if the human race is evolving, or we are stuck where we were thirty one years ago.
There was a patient referred to a hospital by a court for an examination by a gynecologist. It was a case for divorce, in which the husband had claimed that the wife did not have normal external sex organs. The court wanted a gynecologist to examine and state if that was true. That was not true, as was found out by local gynecologist. I wondered how any lawyer would advise a client to seek a divorce on these false grounds, which can be verified easily by a gynecologist. Or perhaps the husband stuck to his claim and the lawyer represented him, just as he/she would represent any client, outcome not guaranteed.
That reminded me of a case that had been referred for the same reason thirty one years ago, when I was a Resident Doctor. It came for hearing when I had become a Lecturer. I stated that the wife was normal. The husband's lawyer said "I charge that you have colluded with the defendant". I put on a bored expression and looked at the clouds in the distance through a window. The judge got irritated by the lawyer and asked me if that was true. I politely said that it was not true. The court seemed to accept my statement about my findings.
I wonder if the human race is evolving, or we are stuck where we were thirty one years ago.
