The resignation of the editor of the South African Medical Journal – relating to an opinion piece on the war in Gaza – has caused a fissure in the sector, where “healthcare before politics”, as difficult as that may be, is generally seen to be a guiding principle.
The South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) has called for the immediate reinstatement of Dr Bridget Farham in the wake of her “unfair and unprofessional treatment” and ousting by the South African Medical Association (SAMA), while a doctor whose original opinion, which Farham would not publish and which was one of those which ignited the controversy, gives context and justification.
BusinessLIVE had reported that “the war in Gaza cost Farham her job when she declined to publish two articles critical of Israel’s attack on Gaza because neither had made reference to the 7 October attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians”.
She had outlined her reasons for the rejection in an editorial (see full text below), saying there was “no moral equivalence” between the Hamas raid and Israel’s continuing destruction of Gaza, but resigned after SAMA criticised this.
She then withdrew her editorial after emails from pro-Palestinian SAMA members and later agreed to “a mutual parting of ways” after the SAMA executive cited “reputational damage”, having issued an arbitrary head office public apology without consulting her.
The SAJBD issued a statement urging that Farham be reinstated. It said her forced resignation followed “a torrent of abuse meted out from pro-Palestine SAMA members, and SAMA itself”, according to the statement from Wendy Kahn, national director, SAJBD, which was published in Politics Web.
It added that this unprofessional and unfair treatment of Farham by SAMA was an unacceptable form of bullying that attempted to cancel anyone who dared to express a different view in spite of academic rigour.
By forcing Farham to resign, said the statement, SAMA had brought itself into disrepute and damaged the proud reputation of an organisation that claimed to unify doctors with diverse backgrounds and exists “to serve its members’ best interests and needs in all healthcare-related matters”.
Not only are they not fulfilling their mandate, but they are also behaving in a manner that is contrary to what we would hope to see from a medical professional body, said the SAJBD statement.
In response, the subsequent explanatory letter (below) was published in BusinessLIVE by Dr Aayesha Soni, specialist neurologist and volunteer with Gift of the Givers, who said doctors were “duty bound to speak out against abuses of human rights – as is the case in Gaza” and who said she wanted to “set the record straight”.
“I am a frequent commentator on the conflict in Gaza. I was approached by a colleague to write an editorial for the SAMJ on the situation. The focus would be on the systematic weaponisation of health by Israel in Gaza – healthcare facilities and workers have been deliberately and inhumanely targeted and killed. This isn’t a novel concept, and the sheer scale of healthcare destruction in Gaza has attracted the outcry of doctors globally.
Reports have been published in reputable journals, including The Lancet and British Medical Journal. In his editorial published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr Matthew Wynia made two unimpeachable points:
• Health professionals should condemn dehumanisation and acts of genocide; and
• Health professionals have special responsibilities to speak out against certain war crimes.
Israel is guilty of the above – of that there is no evidence lacking from multiple human rights resources, and this dates back to before 7 October. Speaking out against it in all forms is our moral obligation, and so it would make sense that South Africa’s main academic medical journal would do so too.
My article was fact-based, with 20 references, and unemotive; it is now published as a scientific article in the South African Journal of Bioethics and Law. SAMJ editor Bridget Farham replied saying that she found it one-sided without me mentioning the events of 7 October.
I replied that I could write about the politics of the 75-year Israeli occupation of Palestine, but that I didn’t think that would be appropriate for the SAMJ. Further, the events of 7 October must be viewed in the context of an occupied people entitled to armed resistance, a tenet supported under international law. I added that I am well aware that taking a definitive stance against the actions of Israel will come with repercussions, but that silence is complicity.
Instead of engaging me further via email, Farham decided to address her concerns in an editorial. This was gross abuse of her power. I find it unacceptable that what I said in private was misconstrued to express her opinion. I was referred to personally, as was my article.
Farham’s conduct has tarnished the credibility of the SAMJ, which I do not believe her lacklustre apology makes up for. This goes against the ethics of an editor and I applaud Dr Mvuyisi Mzukwa and the leadership at the South African Medical Association for the apology that was released after her editorial. The genocide in Gaza didn’t cost Farham her job – her actions and personal biases did.
The weaponisation of health negates the right to exist and resist. As South African healthcare workers, we must join the call of millions around the world demanding justice against Israel. You cannot have editors using their platform to express personal agendas.”
Farham’s editorial:
Israel, Gaza and moral equivalence
“I have been accused of moral cowardice for declining two submissions that are frankly heavily biased towards Palestine, and neither of which mention the events of 7 October 2023. Perhaps my accuser is correct.
I have certainly had no wish to wade into the intensely complex realm of Israel and Palestine in the pages of the SAMJ; and I stress that the opinions voiced here are mine alone. But perhaps it is time, as the editor of the premier medical journal in South Africa, that I voice my thoughts.
I have no religious affiliations. In fact, I am atheist. But I have always abhorred anti-semitism, anti-Islamic sentiment and racism. My sources of information on the Israel-Gaza conflict are The Guardian, Al Jazeera and Haaretz, which will give an idea of my political bias. I watched the events of 7 October 2023 with complete horror.
An Israeli friend, whose family was displaced from the southern Gaza border on that day, let us all know that he was safe. My many Jewish friends and colleagues were in a state of complete shock.
I must be honest and say that I did not ask my Muslim friends how they were feeling, which may have been an oversight. However, reading the news, acts of anti-semitism around the globe massively increased immediately after the event, even before Israel launched their ‘self defence’ barrage of missiles into Gaza. That alone tells me that anti-semitism lies very close to the surface, and the feeling that there is no longer a safe homeland is completely understandable.
But now, 160 days into the war, I am once again watching in complete horror as Israel goes, to my mind, far beyond the right to self defence. The utter devastation that has been wreaked on Gaza is of biblical proportions and indeed Benjamin Netanyahu has used biblical references when sending his army into Gaza.
The death toll so far exceeds any other recent conflict and the disproportionate killing of women and children is horrific and cannot be seen as ‘collateral damage’. And now that we have entered the holy month of Ramadan, the images of families at Iftar meals in the rubble are heart-breaking.
The almost complete destruction of medical facilities, the use of rape as a weapon of war (evidence suggests by both sides in the conflict) and the sheer scale of the destruction and displacement are to be condemned.
I have mixed feelings about South Africa’s petition to the ICJ accusing Israel of genocide, mainly because they have been remarkably silent about similar events in Sudan and Democratic Republic of the Congo, and not because I feel the case was completely without merit.
The same person who accused me of moral cowardice for not publishing her submission on the weaponisation of health system destruction also said that she, and many others, feel that the events of 7 October 2023 can be justified by 75 years of Israeli oppression.
This is where I cannot agree. Nothing justifies the horror that was meted out to families on the southern Gaza border that day. Just as nothing justifies Israel’s continuing destruction of Gaza and its people. There is no moral equivalence.”
BusinessLIVE article – Editor ousted: Gaza conflict costs journalist her job (Restricted access)
BusinessLIVE article –LETTER: Health care before politics (Restricted access)