Spies: What happened to choice?
Rugby365 editor Jan de Koning looks at the protracted Pierre Spies saga and wonders if there are some underlying reasons for the unwillingness of the South African Rugby Union and its commercial arm, SA Rugby (Pty) Ltd, to allow young Pierre Spies to continue playing.
There is something disturbing about the way in which SA Rugby is trying to block the return, to the playing field, of young Springbok star Pierre Spies.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not a medical expert and I will never question the credentials of the Springbok medical staff or the respiratory specialists they have engaged in determining the cause of Spies’s ill health (shortness of breath and blood-stained sputum) at the recent Bok training camp in Durban.
The last thing we want is for the young man to die on the rugby field.
The fact is, SA Rugby and the Bok medical staff have proposed a course of action, which includes “full anticoagulation medication for a minimum of three months”.
This means it precludes the player from any contact sports and, according to SA Rugby, it means Spies won’t be allowed to play till next year.
But by SA Rugby’s own admission, “Spies has the right, in terms of medical principles, to decide whether to undertake the recommended treatment or not.”
And the same “medical principles” also allows Spies the right to a second medical opinion – which he has sought and subsequently the initial diagnosis was challenged.
Any human being has the right to a second (or alternative) medical opinion, no matter what the illness or injury is. The person then has the right to choose which opinion he regards as in his own best interest.
It is something called choice!
Choice implies broadly the freedom to choose.
The dictionary defines it as: “The power, right, or liberty to choose; option.”
Spies exercised that right. He chose to seek a second (after SA Rugby’s first diagnoses in Durban) and now a fourth (after the Cape Town specialist) opinion.
At the time of the writing of this column I did not know the results of the fourth set of tests.
However, I do know that at least one medical expert has challenged the findings of SA Rugby and their medical experts and I know that Spies feels strongly enough about the matter to continue seeking answers.
All he wants to do is play rugby and he feels he is fit enough.
Spies is exercising his right to choose and SA Rugby seems reluctant to allow him that right.
Do you agree/disagree with Jan?
