Case 6

Laura Bohannon, in her book Return to Laughter (Bowen, Elenore, 1964, Doubleday),
describes a dilemma when smallpox begins to rage through an African country. She has
been vaccinated but cannot get the people to go to the hospital to get vaccinated by
Western doctors. Their way of coping with it, is to banish a person from the tribe as soon
as a person contracts smallpox. If Bohannon goes after the banished man to give him
food and returns without having smallpox she will be considered a witch. This will mean
she can no longer study these people effectively. Would you stay in the tribe or go help
the man?

Assumptions

(none)

Opinion

I think Bohannon should not go to help the man.

Supporting reasons

1. If she goes to help the man, shell be considered a witch. This will ruin her
chances of studying these people and more importantly, of having any chance of
preventing the occurrence of more cases of smallpox by persuading the villages to
get themselves vaccinated.
2. Its a case of ones good vs the societys good. If Bohannon goes to feed the
banished man she may possibly save his life but will lose the chance of working
for the benefit of the whole tribe. If she does the opposite, then the banished man
may lose his life but she may have a chance of preventing any further occurrence
of smallpox. She may prevent hundreds of men from being banished in future.

3. How long can Bohannon give food to the banished man? This is only a short-term
solution. The long term solution is to free their minds from the superstitions that
they have. She wont stand any chance to do that if shes considered a witch.

4. Bohannon might possibly save the banished man as well if she manages to
convince the tribals to give up their superstitious beliefs.

Counter Arguments

1. How can she not save the man? Thats her first duty as a responsible doctor.

The answer is as expressed in reason 2. Besides making people get rid of their
irrational thoughts is also a part of her duty.
 2. The principle of ones good vs. societys good does not hold true. Isnt our Indian
Legal system based on the principle that one innocent should not be punished
even if hundred criminals may go scot free?

An excellent counter argument ! The answer is a little tricky as the argument

seems plausible. One may counter by saying that the two situations are entirely
different and should not be compared. In fact it is so. You may argue that if a
situation arises that if by punishing one innocent hundred other innocents would
be freed else all hundred would be punished, even a core believer in the principle
of the Indian Legal System would punish the one innocent instead of hundred.

3. What if Bohannon is not able to convince the tribals and the banished man dies as
well?

Its possible but Bohannon has no control of the future consequences. She should do
what she feels is the right thing to do. And I feel that not helping the man and
working for the benefit of the entire tribal community is the right thing to do. Besides,
taking risk is a part of life.

Consequences

Stated earlier