In the wee hours of the morning of April 19th, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was transferred from Taipei Veterans General Hospital in Taipei to Taichung Prison’s Pei Teh Hospital.
The matter prompted Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) members to block proceedings in the Legislative Yuan, while overseas Taiwanese groups and human rights activists lodged strong protests. Why did the case cause such an uproar?
There are two reasons: First, the way it was handled by the Ministry of Justice, and second, the fact that the new facilities are totally inadequate for treatment of the multiple medical and psychological issues from which Chen is suffering.
The sudden transfer, in the early hours of the morning, as well as that neither the family, nor the medical team treating him were notified by the ministry, were gregarious violations of Chen’s human rights and show the callous disregard of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government for Chen’s welfare and his medical condition.
The ministry’s argument that it wanted to avoid crowds trying to block the transfer is reminiscent of the martial law era and has no place in a modern, democratic and open society which values transparency in government.
The move also disregards the medical advice given by doctors at the Taipei Veterans General Hospital.
Just a couple of weeks earlier, one of Chen’s attending physicians, Chou Yuan-hua (周元華), a renowned and respected psychiatrist, recommended that Chen be allowed to receive treatment in a home environment or in a hospital with a specialized psychiatry ward, where he could receive adequate medical care. This hospital should be located close to his home so he can have close contact with his family, Chou said.
Another highly regarded doctor, Lai Chi-wan (賴其萬), said in a letter to the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) published on Tuesday that the sudden transfer constituted a serious violation of medical ethical standards.
He said that when a patient is transferred from one hospital to another, the patient and his or her family should be briefed in advance to ensure a smooth transfer that causes the least trauma to the patient, and that medical records and information are transferred between the doctors of the first hospital and those at the receiving hospital. According to Lai, none of this happened. The team at the Veterans was caught by total surprise, while Pei Teh Hospital did not have a team in place.
In the subsequent flow of propaganda emanating from the justice ministry, the Ma regime tried to imply that Chen was given “special privileges and perks as a former president.”
In documents with pictures it tried to portray the new environment as idyllic, with a hospital room seven times bigger than the cell he had in Taipei Prison, and access to open space with a lawn, as well as ample family visiting privileges.
All of this is meaningless if the medical care is inadequate. As Chen himself told DPP Chairman Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) — who rushed to Taichung after learning of the transfer — the ample space is secondary, and what he needs is good medical care and medical facilities so he can recover.
The sad conclusion one must draw from the episode is that the Ma government’s refusal to listen to medical opinion is in contravention of Ma’s own pledges to adhere to international human rights standards.
The handling of the case also shows little inclination to bring about much-needed political reconciliation within Taiwan. Ma touts his cross-strait rapprochement, but is seriously widening the political gulf separating people in Taiwan.
Mei-chin Chen is a commentator in Washington.
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS