Search

This essay analyses and historicises a contemporary dominant narrative among India's biomedical doctors, that the early post‐independence period (1940s–1970s) was characterised by immense public trust and confidence in the biomedical profession, with the patient‐doctor relationship experiencing a 'golden era'. By exploring people's experiences with and perceptions of doctors during these decades, I show that contrary to contemporary understanding, public dissatisfaction with doctors was substantial even in the early post‐independence period. I argue that the dominance of privileged‐caste and ‐class Indians in the medical profession nurtured a caste privilege‐based elitist outlook within the mainstream profession and its leadership and created an insurmountable socioeconomic distance between doctors and the large majority of the public. What doctors deemed as people's 'trust' in them and their profession was often simply a manifestation of people's general deference towards the elites of the society. This incorrect interpretation of patient‐doctor dynamics in the past has been a constant feature of mainstream narratives around the doctor‐society relationship in post‐independence India and has remained largely under‐explored and under‐historicised in the medical, scholarly and public discourses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction to a special section brings together three papers first presented at a panel, 'Medical Professions in South Asia: Historical and Contemporary Analyses', at the 26th European Conference on South Asian Studies, held in Vienna, Austria and online, in July 2021. All three papers deal with aspects of the professionalisation of biomedical doctors in India since its independence in 1947. The authors bring together historical and sociological approaches to illuminate the growth of specialisms, patterns of practitioner–patient interactions and efforts to maintain occupational closure and maintain status in the face of growing challenges. The introduction concludes with a discussion of the relevance of these papers for the sociology of health and illness in India and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Throughout the post-independence period, the state of Tamil Nadu has consistently performed better than most other states in several major healthcare indicators, including infant mortality rate and total fertility rate. At the same time, it has received praise for the deep penetration and robust functioning of its public health system. Tamil Nadu's achievements in healthcare have been analysed in a number of scholarly studies in the past, and a recent book by Kalaiyarasan A and Vijayabaskar M, titled "The Dravidian Model: Interpreting the Political Economy of Tamil Nadu," is the latest addition to this literature. The authors argue that the state's uniqueness in human and social development primarily originates in the egalitarian politics and radical social movements of the early twentieth century which constituted a "Dravidian common-sense" that has since "shaped the development trajectory of the state." Their arguments on the significance of egalitarian politics in improvements in health and wellbeing receive ample support from existing social sciences literature on health, equity, and justice.

Abuse and bullying during medical residency are common experiences of most doctors in India, but do not seem to have invited any major corrective action from the leaders of the medical profession. This kind of abuse is also on many occasions fuelled by prevalent misconceptions around caste hierarchies and the supposed non-deserving nature of students who enter the profession using reservations. The professional leadership has similarly turned a blind eye to the dominance of such damaging ideas and myths on college and hospital campuses, which in unfortunate instances have led to agonising mental torture and deaths by suicide of harassed students. The medical profession needs to collectively act on workplace abuse as well as casteist harassment before it is too late.