People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol.
XXVIII
No. 41 October 10, 2004 |
AIDWA
Wants Army To Become Gender Sensitive
THE
All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) has called for a clear-cut
gender sensitive policy for the armed forces given the policy of the army to
employ women. It has suggested that a set of rules regarding the recruitment and
service conditions of women be framed and publicised so that all are aware of it
as it would certainly help not only the women applicants concerned but the
institution itself.
The
AIDWA general secretary Brinda Karat stated this on October 1, 2004 in her reply
to a letter from army chief General Vij. The army chief had responded to
AIDWA’s taking up the case of a young woman applicant who refused to undergo
intimate physical examination by a male army doctor. (See AIDWA letter to army
chief on this issue in the accompanying box)
The
AIDWA has further called for standardisation of medical tests. It pointed out
that the two young women army aspirants, who had initially objected to being
physically examined by male doctors along with Surya Moudgil but went through
the exercise subsequently, have refuted the claims of the chief of the army
staff that their physical test was conducted by a female doctor. Karat
emphatically stated that they were examined by male doctors though the nature of
tests conducted at the Delhi base hospital was different from the one to be done
at Allahabad.
Whereas
in Allahabad the candidates had to go through intimate tests involving removal
of clothes, in the subsequent tests at Delhi they were asked to undergo only the
ultra sound tests. Similarly, the male surgeon in Delhi did not conduct the
tests for piles as was done in Allahabad, the two girls have said in two
different letters addressed to the AIDWA general secretary, Brinda Karat.
Ms Karat has however stated in her reply to the army chief: “we appreciate your concern and the assurance that hospitals have been sensitised on the issue. Requests of all candidates remain our prime concern and since this is only the first case wherein a female candidate has felt agitated would indicate to you our own sensitivity towards their sentiment. Having said this, we would also like to stress that we shall not like to question the ‘ethics of the medical profession’. Even their hippocratic oath at the time of graduation is reflective of that ethic.” (INN)