On allowing a killer to be a doctor...

Life is full of paradox. Things do not always have quick and easy answers, even if we as humans are prone to rush to one. The recent news of the dilemma in Sweden on whether to allow a convicted killer to be a doctor is thought provoking.

When I first read of the news, my very first knee-jerk response was "certainly not." But I read it again, for the few details that can be cued from the story. The guy was a hate crime killer, serving two-thirds of his almost seven years' sentence, and was released. While serving time, he self-taught himself from online courses, and managed to get in the prestigious Karolinska Institute, famous for selecting Nobel Prize in medicine, with good grades. The supposedly stringent interview process failed to vet him for his "missing" some six years when he's in prison. It was only afterwards he's started the study, that he's found out to have been a convicted murderer. He's allowed an opportunity to explain himself, but expressed no remorse of the killing.

So, should he be allowed to study medicine and become a doctor, or should he be kicked out?

Obviously, this is a bright young man. It would have been a great mind wasted, if he's not put into productive work. But so do most serial killers and offenders who have above average IQ. Should they be allowed the chance to be a doctor, if they qualify academically? Well...let's not answer it just yet.

The classmates of his class were split 50-50 between allowing him to stay and expelling him. It's argued that he's already done time for what he's done, so he should be allowed to do what he pursues. Those favored kicking him out said they are scared of having him in the same class. Neither is good enough argument for me.

The point that would prompt me to argue against this man is his lack of remorse. Over the course of their professional life, doctors would make a lot of ethical and moral decisions, thus doctors need to be judged not only on academic and residency experience, but their character and integrity. If this man does not think killing a man is wrong, then he would very likely make very bad and even fatal decisions after he becomes a doctor.

Should we then grant him the medical license if he shows remorse and wants to do good for the society? History, of course, has shown us that there are twisted minds who can say one thing (remorse), but act entirely differently. While we have to be careful of that, and there's no sure bet of that, one should bear in mind that most people deserve a second chance, if they are given the right kind of opportunity, and with PLENTY of monitoring.

Subsequently, the Institute kicked him out on technicality, since he falsified his name on a document, thus sidestepping the real issue that needs clearer guideline for the future. The Swedish licensing body indicated that even if he completes his study, the body would not have granted him a medical license to practice due to his conviction. The moral dilemma looks to rest for now, but it'll bubble up again.

I wonder what this man is going to do next, now that his focus (to be a doctor) is dashed. I hope he won't revert back to criminal pursuit.