NEET SS Doctor Quits Over Beard Shaving Demand
Share
Following being told to shave his beard, which he uses for religious reasons, a Muslim doctor who got admission to Kovai Medical College and Hospital (KMCH) in Coimbatore through NEET-SS has formally complained with the National Medical Commission (NMC). Out of worry that he might be required to compromise his religious beliefs by the requirement, the doctor left his super-specialty post. KMCH required Dr. N—that is, as he is known—to shave his beard as part of a professional grooming norm. He insisted that Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees his fundamental religious freedom but that the teaching was arbitrary. In his grievance to the NMC, he said his cut and groomed beard neither limited his ability to care for patients nor followed hospital protocols. Dr. N, according to KMCH officials, submitted all the needed documentation upon admission and was thereafter instructed to shave in order to finish his course. Though he claimed his beard was part of his religious identity, the hospital authorities are reported to have kept their stance, therefore he had no choice but to withdraw from the program. In his letter to the NMC, the doctor emphasized that the hospital’s policy was discriminatory. He wondered why his beard was being singled out given that other religious customs such as turbans, hijabs, or crosses are fairly accepted in professional settings including hospitals. Moreover, he asserted that his religious affiliation appeared to be targeted under this grooming policy. “I have merited my seat. Starting my super-specialty training felt like something I had been looking forward for a long time. In his resignation, he said, “I cannot, nevertheless, abandon a fundamental element of my religious rite just to adhere to a random rule. ” The complaint has been sent to the NMC’s PGMEB, which oversees postgraduate and super-specialty medical education in India. Dr. N has asked the NMC to give unambiguous directions so that the rights of students and professionals from minority groups whose religious expressions—including beard wearing—are vital to their identity are protected. Legal analysts backing Dr. N’s case believe the hospital’s limitations would be deemed unfair and unconstitutional unless it can demonstrate that a beard—especially one well maintained—threatens patient safety or hygiene. They give domestic and foreign law instances in which grooming laws were rejected because they excessively restricted religious freedom. Furthermore reported to the Medical Counseling Committee (MCC), which is in charge of assigning NEET-SS seats, is Dr. N’s departure. It is unknown still if his chair will be kept till the complaint is settled or if it will be reassigned. KMCH is meanwhile said to have stated that their grooming rules are meant to encourage professionalism and cleanliness in a medical environment. However, they did not specify whether exceptions are made for religious grounds and refused to go into detail, saying that the issue is still being evaluated. Among medical practitioners as well as supporters of religious freedom, this case has generated debate; many believe medical institutions should update their policies to better reflect the diversity of the country. They argue that professional standards should not be given precedence over one’s personal or religious identity when they have no bearing on the quality of care delivered. Having started reviewing the grievance, Dr. N is waiting for a decision from the NMC. The choice might affect his future in the field as well as how medical colleges throughout India handle religious expression. The result could set a precedent for the future in cases involving faith-based grooming habits in professional settings.
