…We Can Defend What We Did – UPTH Mgt.
The simmering controversy over the removal of the womb of a 28-year-old lady is far from over, just as a human rights body handling the matter, Watch for Justice International Initiative, LAWJII, has insisted that the management of the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital, UPTH certainly has a case to answer in the way and manner surgical operations were carried out on Rukayat Afolabi leading to the removal of her uterus without her consent.
The human rights organization had expressed total condemnation of the procedure that took place during the time the victim (Rukayat) who was pregnant with complications was on admission to deliver a baby at the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital,(UPTH),where her uterus was said to have been removed without her consent, even after losing the baby in her womb.
The group, in a chat with journalists in Port Harcourt decried alleged unethical practices by the team of medical personnel who carried out the surgical operations on Rukayat, which aim was to save the life of the victim. The body reasoned that it is possible for the victim to have lost her baby in the process based on the complications she suffered during pregnancy, but frowned at the outcome of the whole process that left Rukayat without a womb for life, and the loss of her entire essence as a woman, without her knowledge and consent.
It would be recalled that same rights group had petitioned the Rivers State Commissioner of police and all relevant agencies over the matter recently, when it asked for the reassignment of the matter to another police officer for what it described as lack of due diligence in the investigation of the matter.
During the media briefing in Port Harcourt, LAWJII, comprising solicitors, recalled the incident took place since 1 February,2018 whereby, according to the group “an unfortunate and heavily pregnant Rukayat Afolabi was admitted at the UPTH,Port Harcourt, Rivers State for delivery of her baby due to complications.” Rukayat was in an excellent frame of mind at the time and walked into the theatre room unaided.
” In course of delivery of the still born child, the medical team consisting of one Prof. (Dr.) John Ikimalo,Dr. Abel and others ,opted for an ill- fated The group representative, Modilyne Olowu,Esq,also told journalists present that no post operation counselling was carried out on the patient who remained at the UPTH for 19 days following surgical operation (HYSTERECTOMY), and without her knowledge, consent/ approval,her uterus (womb) was surgically removed.”
LAWJII queried the extent of suffering and loss of her entire essence as a woman, the act it regarded as “a flagrant disregard to Rukayat Afolabi’s right to bodily autonomy and integrity, contrary to Article 14 (1)(a) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights as well as the provision of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
Also, angered by the treatment meted out to Rukayat, which the group stated that unfortunately the act was carried out by medical professionals and., “not by the acts of criminal elements or medical quacks, which in its views amounted to” gross “medical negligence and a breach of the professional ethics of the Nigerian Medical Association, and as enshrined in the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act, Cap. M8, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2019.
As the matter continues to generate interest among members of the public and online platforms, the management of the UPTH could not immediately respond to tell its own side of the story,after initial calls place to its Public Relations Officer, Elabha Meni.
But when the management of the UPTH eventually responded (not to this medium) on a radio interview monitored by this medium, the PRO was quoted as saying that everything done to Rukayat was professionally done and can be defended anywhere.
Meanwhile, LAWJII has demanded the revocation and suspension of the medical licenses of the medical team” involved in the non consensual and unauthorized surgical operation on Rukayat Afolabi,in the interest of justice.
The body warned that failure to take necessary actions, including the arrest and prosecution of the team, it would not hesitate to institute legal action against the surgical team and the UPTH management and ” any other person (s) connected to the perpetration of this dastardly act.”
But in an official reaction by the management of the UPTH, through a press release (a copy of which was obtained by this medium through proxy) expressed disappointment over what it described as a” malicious and scandalous statement being peddeled by one Mrs. Chiwendu Ruka, as we know her, who was managed by the hospital when in critical condition and all the ethical standards maintained. Professional practice necessitated that we saved her life taking appropriate measures but not without the consent of Mr. Chiwendu,her spouse.”
The teaching hospital claimed that drugs and treatments were dispensed without payment by Rukayat, whom they alleged absconded from the hospital since when asked to come for checkups. The hospital management also reacted to the petition filed by the rights group on behalf of Rukayat. According to the management all the moves being made by Rukayat were attempts to malign the image of the hospital.
A released signed by Elabha Meni, Acting Public Relations Officer , on behalf of the Chief Medical Director of UPTH, expressed the readiness of the management to follow the matter to its logical conclusion, saying that” our legal team is working on the matter and is prepared to follow it through…”
But, in spite of the position of the UPTH management on the matter, the human rights group has insisted that the team involved in Rukayat matter has a case to answer, even as it frowned at what it described as violation of the victim’s body autonomy, against the backdrop of lack of her personal consent.
It remains to be seen in the coming days how the controversy surrounding Rukayat condition will be resolved, even as the ‘boyfriend’ who impregnated Rukayat was said to be at large in order to avoid the long arm of the law.
