The announcement by Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee that the remains of Sangeeta Persaud, who died in controversial circumstances, will be exhumed to have a second opinion on the cause of her death is a welcome one as it has caused quite a stir. This second opinion should go a long way in bringing a proper closure to this most unfortunate death of a child.
According to the minister the post mortem will be conducted by an overseas pathologist, which he says will bring some form of closure for relatives of the deceased.
Rohee said since the incident has caused national controversy as to how the teenager died, the government has decided to look into the matter.
It was also good to learn that the minister met with relatives of Persaud at Canal Number Two who supported the exhumation.
Rohee said that he has seen the interim report submitted by the ‘D’ Division police which details the post mortem results, with the cause of death described as undetermined.
The examination was conducted by government pathologist Dr. Nehaul Singh at the Georgetown Public Hospital mortuary. The post mortem was witnessed by a Detective Lance Corporal after the body was identified by the teen’s mother, and samples were taken for tests.
Rohee explained that the foreign pathologist was summoned because there is need for a second opinion.
When asked whether he is aware of a report in a section of the print media which stated that Persaud died of meningitis, Rohee said he had not seen an official document to date and as such he is not at liberty to comment.
However, in hindsight it is a bit puzzling that, seeing the interim police report described the cause of death as undetermined and the controversy and serious implications surrounding the issue, would it not have been wise to delay the burial of the body to facilitate a second opinion? From a scientific and medical standpoint the decomposition of the body would make it more difficult for the pathologist to determine the cause of death. Perhaps the police and the other relevant authorities should use this as a learning experience and in future act with more wisdom.
Nevertheless, the effort to bring the matter to a proper closure is a commendable one and we would all hope that with the intervention of the foreign pathologist the controversy would be cleared to the satisfaction of all.
But this tragedy should teach us to look into the future and make strenuous and persistent efforts to ensure such tragedies do not recur in our society. In order to do this we have to step up education to heighten the awareness of people about the uselessness of superstition and its consequential harm and destruction.
A t the same time these confidence tricksters who pose as “healers” and simply fleece and exploit innocent people have to be uprooted from the society. They must not be tolerated or given any sympathy because they are simply harming people and do not make any positive societal contribution.
It is disgusting and disturbing that in a scientifically advanced world and in an era when people should be more educated and intelligent we still have some amongst us who seek to instill superstitious beliefs in people for their own self gratification. But worse yet is that they inevitably succeed in convincing many people which eventually leads to a myriad of problems. The sad and unfortunate death of Sangeeta Persaud could be one such example. But we have to wait on the results of the post mortem to be performed by the foreign pathologist.
Jim Walker in an excellent article: “The problems with beliefs” perhaps gives a perfect insight into the problem: “Beliefs and faiths represent a type of mental activity that produces an unnecessary and dangerous false sense of trust and wrongful information (thinking coupled with the feeling of ‘truth’). Faith rarely agrees with the world around us. History has shown that beliefs and faith, of the most intransigent kind, have served as the trigger for tragic violence and destruction and sustained the ignorance of people. Replacing beliefs with predictive thoughts based on experience and evidence provide a means to eliminate intransigence and dangerous superstitious thought.”
“Beliefs and faiths do not establish “truths” or facts. It does not matter how many people believe or for how many centuries they have believed it. It does not matter how reverent or important people think of them, if it does not agree with evidence, then it simply cannot have any validity to the outside world. All things we know about the world, we can express without referring to a belief. Even at its most benign level, beliefs can act as barriers to further understanding.”