SOME will recall a story published a few years ago in the Stabroek News under the caption, “Boy loses eyesight after extraction by quack dentist.”
Since then, although Guyana has been regularly training dentists, there persists, albeit mostly in interior areas, persons who pretend to be dental professionals. This report serves as a living example of the magnitude of the consequences one is exposed to when acquiescent to the therapeutic fraud carried out by the so-called quacks. Since that incident, there have been cases in which individuals have been seriously mutilated by ‘quacks’ who believe they practise dentistry.
Typically, four salient points exist in the aforementioned case that should be examined in the circumstances.
Having experienced a severe toothache, the patient consulted the quack, who advised him to get the tooth out. The quack then extracted the affected tooth without hesitation.
Point one. Only dentists and dental nurses (dental technicians) in this country are trained in the art of dentistry, and are obviously the only ones qualified to advise anyone with respect to such matters. They know that a toothache is not one of the six indications for extraction.
If the patient had visited any Government Dental Clinic, explained the exacerbation of the pain, and complied with the attending dentist’s advice, that professional could have taken the necessary action to mitigate the suffering.
Point two. Whenever a person seeks the services of a quack, they become an accomplice to a crime under Chapter 134, Part IV, Article 38 of the Laws of Guyana. No one could be a quack unless there were patients seeking treatment from them.
Point three. Evidently, an extraction was not indicated at the time. Also, the patient should not have been instructed to rinse out his mouth with salt water soon after the extraction. If indeed medication was required in the circumstance to mitigate any infection present, it should be properly prescribed based on its type, dosage, condition severity, and the patient’s body weight. It was barbaric to tell the patient, “buy 20 red and black tablets and swallow one every four hours”, as was alleged in the article.
Point four. When asked if he had any intention of providing financial assistance to the victim after the botched extraction, the quack replied in the negative and suggested that “he can take his own action.” Obviously, the quack knew that no one could take legal action against him. It’s like a person reporting to the police that someone stole a kilogram of cocaine from his house. Clearly, the person making the complaint will be arrested.
People who subject themselves to the mercy of quacks cannot expect any redress, as no law provides for the accomplice of a crime to receive exoneration.
More than 95 per cent of the population of this country lives on the north-eastern coast from Skeldon to Charity. Thirty-five of the Ministry of Health’s dental clinics are found in this part of the country. The patient resided on the Coast, with easy access to a dental professional.
The patient became blind because he contracted a fulminating infection of the entire globe (eyeball), with severe oedema of the appendageal structures. The quack obviously did not know that distinct precautions must be taken for each tooth to be extracted. For example, the upper molars have their apices in proximity to the maxillary sinus, sometimes even penetrating the same.
The extraction created a communication channel that facilitated the transmission of the infection (most likely from septic conditions) to the sinus, then to the orbital cavity, and eventually to the eyeball itself. Unfortunately, the patient paid dearly for his mistake.