Faulty Med. Education causes Mal-ditribution of Doctors

Our medical education system is not bothered about National needs. It is primarily concerned about the needs of the city elites to get medical education- broadly needed by city-dwellers or developed countries. That is why MBBS course is immediately followed by Post-graguate courses like M.S. or M.D. The country needs basic doctors- right? We have around 7 lakhs of doctors having a ratio of 6.7/10000 people.Nearly 70% of MBBS graduates from state-owned colleges manage to get admission to  Post-graduate courses and immediately they are posted as Resident Medical Officers (RMOs) in the same hospital for their entire period of trainingof 3 years. Thus,while they are qualifying,they have already had full expperience in their specialised branch. But what about the MBBS doctors who wish to or are forced to enter into Basic Doctor's profession--Primary health-care  provider, Family  physician, General practitioner, are the other names for this group. There is absolutely No Opportunity to get a single day's experience for them-- They are totally neglected. Therefore, there is a self-created shortage of Basic Doctors and those who are available are totally denied any experience in the field of Primary health care.The Hue and Cry about the shotage of doctors is purely PHONY.
             The remedy is very simple, indeed. The medical colleges must run Their Own Primery health Centers under the department of Social and Preventive  Care and start a training course of 2 or 3 years in General Practice and admit at least 20% of the graduates in this course. The nation will now get qualified and experienced PHC Doctors and they will definitely be willing to go to semi-urben and rural areas-- Provided they are properly paid and treated respectfully. The govt. is ignoring both these ideas and then crying hoarse about non-availability of doctors. There are many more advantages in this scheme but more about it in my next blog  
     

Remove Voting Rights to Slum-Dwellers

To

The Editor DNA/Rakesh Bhatnagar

Your article "OFFCOURT" page 16, Monday March 7, 2011 makes an interesting reading, especially the last two paragraphs. You have raised two important questions 1) Whether the incumbent would or would not be able to function? and 2) Whether the working of the institution would suffer? and, in the last paragraph you have concluded that "there is no justification for tolerating the chargesheeted law makers in our parliament/assembly". The conclusion is fully justifiable but the same priciple is not applied by any journalist or any intellectual when they discuss the problems of the slum-dwellers.

Sixty percentage of the population in mumbai stays in illegal slums. It is clearly accepted that their homes are illegal and yet they all find their way in the voter's lists after six months of stay. No one has questioned the validity of allowing them to vote. If sixty percent of the voter's are law breaking members of the society, how can their elected representative be a law maker? This is amply seen when the MLA's and MP's actively obstruct the legal authorities who come to implement the law. Even the airport authorities in Mumbai are not able to remove the illegal slums for the socially important expansion of the airport. In fact, the slum-dwellers are able to blackmail the society by demanding new legal settlement at the cost of tax payer. The law breaker MLA's and MP's keep up demanding more and more facilities and free quarters for them, as they cann't get elected without appeasing the sixty percent law breakers.

Applying the logic that was applied in the case of Mr. Thomas and the conclusions you have drawn, will it not be appropriate to deny any voting rights to the confirmed illegal residents in Mumbai as well as all metropolitan cities? Otherwise the incumbent will not able to function and maintain law; the working of the assembly/parliament will suffer. In fact, it is suffering badly and the so-called law makers show no respect to law even in the houses.

I am not against the Rehabilitation of the slum-dwellers. That is a valid political decision but a) It must be done without taxing the law abiding population and b) The slum-dwellers should be eligible for voting only after they are rehabilitated in proper legal dwellings. All over the world the people are rehabilitated at their own cost, even if it be concessional, nor is there any incidence even in the country where they are given quarters Free of Charge, when the mill workers who were law abiding working citizens of Mumbai are being offered quarters for Rs. 12 lakhs for 225 sq. ft. area.

Sir, Your logic is not being applied whole heartedly.

With Regards,

Dr. S.V. Nadkarni,
Ex. Dean L.T.M. Med. College,
Sion, Mumbai,
Email: sadanadkarni@gmail.com,
Tel: 09320044525 / 022-24468633,
Website: http://www.healthandsociety.in/
Suraj Eleganza II, Mahim (W)-400016