Jump to content

Shortage of doctors in india


Is it ethical to recruit doctors from India when they are short of doctors?  

11 members have voted

  1. 1. Is it ethical to recruit doctors from India when they are short of doctors?

    • Yes
      4
    • No
      7


Recommended Posts

So you believe that the problem isn't the Indian healthcare system and one to be only based around pay?

 

I believe India can't retain the doctors it trains because condition and pay are better elsewhere; by poaching their doctors for our own benefit we slow their progress in making it better for their own people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe India can't retain the doctors it trains because condition and pay are better elsewhere; by poaching their doctors for our own benefit we slow their progress in making it better for their own people.

 

If pay was the issue why do they come here instead of the USA where the pay is better?

 

The majority, if not all of the Indian doctors I know come here for the training and the experience. As for their future plans, they usually go to whatever post they feel offers their best opportunities irrespective of country, something that is true most junior doctors.

 

If India could offer a similar training and experience I'm sure that more would stay at home.

 

As I said the challenge for India is improving their health care system to both offer the opportunities for the training and experience to keep the junior doctors at home and tempt more experienced doctors back home.

 

That is a challenge that only the Indian government can solve. If we stopped recruiting from India all that would happen is the the Indian doctors would go elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If pay was the issue why do they come here instead of the USA where the pay is better?

 

The majority, if not all of the Indian doctors I know come here for the training and the experience. As for their future plans, they usually go to whatever post they feel offers their best opportunities irrespective of country, something that is true most junior doctors.

 

If India could offer a similar training and experience I'm sure that more would stay at home.

 

As I said the challenge for India is improving their health care system to both offer the opportunities for the training and experience to keep the junior doctors at home and tempt more experienced doctors back home.

 

That is a challenge that only the Indian government can solve. If we stopped recruiting from India all that would happen is the the Indian doctors would go elsewhere.

 

So if they come here for training why aren’t we training our own doctors? And why is India looking at training more doctors to replace the ones they trained but have lost to us, but intend to return once they’ve trained here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They could choose their employer, they can choose to be doctors or not, much like if I choose to be in the army but can't choose where they send me. If I didn't want to go then I could choose not to join.

 

There are a number of military specialisations which can only be practised in the Armed Forces, but it's a very small number. Most military personnel have skills which can be - and often are - adapted to civilian jobs.

 

When you were planning to join the Army, had you been told that once you had joined, you were committed for life - or until you were 65 - would you have joined?

 

If there was a specialism - Doctor - which could only be practiced in the military and if, once (s)he joined the military a doctor was going to be obliged to stay in for the whole of his/her working life, how many volunteers do you think you would get?

 

If all doctors everywhere had to work for a supra-national Doctors' Organisation because that was the only employer, how many would stay in the profession for the whole of their working lives?

 

Doctors would still have some choice because they would be required around the world, so there would be posts available in every country and doctors would have the choice which posts to take, obviously you wouldn’t concentrate the doctors round the wealth, you’d concentrate them round the people with the most need for their services.

 

What would you do if you couldn't get a volunteer for a particular post?

 

If you said to somebody: "Well, if you won't volunteer, you're going anyway" and (s)he said: "I resign" what would you do then?

 

You are, however, getting close to suggesting a possible solution to the problem. The British Armed Forces did - in the fairly recent past - have a number of hospitals and they did recruit medical students (or those with a place in medical school) train them (at public cost) pay them while they were in training (not a fortune, but being paid [at today's rates] about £20k per annum and having no tuition fees to pay was certainly attractive to some people.) AFAIK, the system worked pretty well. Some of the doctors who joined stayed in 'for life', others served their commitment and then left.

 

The United States Air Force still offers such a scheme.

 

It would almost certainly be impossible to set up a global organisation, but (provided the state was willing to pay) there is no reason that would prevent the government from offering to train doctors (at state expense) and requiring those so trained to work as NHS employees, paid on a published scale rate for a period of 5-10 years in whatever doctor's post that the NHS required them to fill.

 

After they had completed their commitment, those doctors could either remain in the NHS or work elsewhere.

 

The scheme would work. - But it would be expensive. Furthermore, the doctors who worked for the NHS would be NHS employees (not contractors.) The state would have to provide their surgeries, their equipment and their support staff. If you are going to move people around, you would also have to pay their moving expenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a number of military specialisations which can only be practised in the Armed Forces, but it's a very small number. Most military personnel have skills which can be - and often are - adapted to civilian jobs.

 

When you were planning to join the Army, had you been told that once you had joined, you were committed for life - or until you were 65 - would you have joined?

 

If there was a specialism - Doctor - which could only be practiced in the military and if, once (s)he joined the military a doctor was going to be obliged to stay in for the whole of his/her working life, how many volunteers do you think you would get?

 

If all doctors everywhere had to work for a supra-national Doctors' Organisation because that was the only employer, how many would stay in the profession for the whole of their working lives?

 

 

 

What would you do if you couldn't get a volunteer for a particular post?

 

If you said to somebody: "Well, if you won't volunteer, you're going anyway" and (s)he said: "I resign" what would you do then?

 

You are, however, getting close to suggesting a possible solution to the problem. The British Armed Forces did - in the fairly recent past - have a number of hospitals and they did recruit medical students (or those with a place in medical school) train them (at public cost) pay them while they were in training (not a fortune, but being paid [at today's rates] about £20k per annum and having no tuition fees to pay was certainly attractive to some people.) AFAIK, the system worked pretty well. Some of the doctors who joined stayed in 'for life', others served their commitment and then left.

 

The United States Air Force still offers such a scheme.

 

It would almost certainly be impossible to set up a global organisation, but (provided the state was willing to pay) there is no reason that would prevent the government from offering to train doctors (at state expense) and requiring those so trained to work as NHS employees, paid on a published scale rate for a period of 5-10 years in whatever doctor's post that the NHS required them to fill.

 

After they had completed their commitment, those doctors could either remain in the NHS or work elsewhere.

 

The scheme would work. - But it would be expensive. Furthermore, the doctors who worked for the NHS would be NHS employees (not contractors.) The state would have to provide their surgeries, their equipment and their support staff. If you are going to move people around, you would also have to pay their moving expenses.

 

I’d include a bonus for that post to encourage a doctor to take it on, and I would encourage doctors to work in areas where their language and skills were most suited.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.