Medical Education #NEET & Termite of Corruption, Legalities, Touts


Our society has failed itself  to develop  a robust system of choosing and nurturing good doctors and therefore itself responsible for decline in standards of medical profession. Therefore the quality of doctors who survive and flourish in such system will be a natural consequence of how society chooses and nurtures the best for themselves.

     A  complicated admission process  of NEET counselling  has spawned a micro industry of medical education counsellors- nothing more than mediators and touts.

   Imagine, an opportunity is available to a patient, to decide the doctor as based on his route or marks for entry into medical college. Whether patient will like to get treated by a doctor, who   secured 20% marks, 30 % marks or 60% marks or 80% marks for medical college.  Even   an illiterate person can answer that well. But strangely for selection of doctors, rules were framed so as to dilute the merit to the minimum possible. What is the need to dilute and shortlist around half a million for few thousand seats? Answer to that is simple.  To select and find only those students from millions, who can pay millions to become doctors? 

Doctors are just as offshoots of a tree called as society. They essentially are the same as rest of the society. It is a specialized branch of tree which helps other offshoots of tree to save others. As part of same tree, they resemble the parent society, of which they are part. Society needs to choose and nurture a force of doctors carefully with an aim to combat for safety of its own people.

Exorbitantly expensive medical education and lowered merit has hollowed the quality of doctors  like  termite.  Aspiring doctors are now forced to pay exorbitant fee, in millions. Many go under heavy debt to pay medical colleges fee. Children with lower ranks in merit pay millions and can become doctors. The real problem here is that real deserving will be left out.

Medical students from the very onset,  are victims and witness to these practices and exploitation. They see their parents pay this unreasonable fee through their noses or take loans. Such blatant injustice will have an everlasting effect on the young impressionable minds.  

        The paradox- Society  and armchair preachers give doctors  lessons about  corruption and exploitation.

Medical admission season sees flood of legal cases

Mumbai TIMES OF INDIA: Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, while speaking at a recent event in a Delhi hospital, called for reforms in medical education, referring to the sheer volume of cases that have made their way to the Supreme Court. It is no exaggeration, as the Directorate of General of Health Services’ Medical Counselling Committee (MCC), under the umbrella body of the union ministry of health and family welfare, alone has to deal with nearly 400 cases every year. From high courts to the apex court, the admission season is marred by litigation, from students aspiring to be doctors to doctors aspiring to be specialists and super-specialists. Sometimes, there are other stakeholders too and the stakes are indeed high. The National Eligibility and Entrance Test (NEET) for undergraduate courses, for instance. In the past four years, the number of MBBS aspirants registering for the test rose almost by 25%. Around 17.6 lakh students appeared for NEET-UG in 2022 —the highest for any competitive exam. On the contrary, the number of aspirants for engineering (registering for JEE-Main) dropped in the corresponding four years—from 11.5 lakh in 2019 to 9.05 lakh in 2022. If one takes into account the direct ratio of students to medical seats, 33 are vying for a single seat in a government college. It is further skewed if one considers the pool of seats in each category. The number of seats shrink at PG level. “The competition is fierce for students in the lower rank bracket. Eligibility issues are also a concern in lawsuits. There is a lot of emphasis on students bagging a PG degree, from parents, even colleges.

More students going for higher studies give colleges brownie points in the accreditation process. There is a general sense of feeling that only an MBBS degree is of no consequence. After all of it, if students lose their seat over a technical point, they will prefer moving court over losing a year, he said. Even as thousands of students appear for their NEET-PG today, courts saw several litigation seeking postponement of the exam till last week. “There is no uniformity in the schedule followed by different states, even as there is one central exam for all. Students have to mandatorily complete their internship to be eligible for a PG seat, but the internship deadline in states differ. What is the point of completing the exam in March and waiting till July for the counselling round? Such policy decisions are not student-friendly, and therefore are met with opposition,” said parent representative.  Former member (board of governor), erstwhile Medical Council of India and dean (projects) at Tata Memorial Hospital, Dr Kailash Sharma, said clarity from National Medical Commission, from MCC, government of India, is expected. “Similar cases in lower courts should be bundled and heard by the apex court that will also reduce time on each case,” said Sharma. Meanwhile, a complicated admission process has spawned a micro industry of medical education counsellors. The process is complicated for an 18-year old to manage on his own.

     Advantages-Disadvantage of being a doctor

     25 factors- why health care is expensive

REEL Heroes Vs Real Heroes

 21 occupational risks to doctors and nurses

Covid paradox: salary cut for doctors other paid at home

   Medical-Consumer protection Act- Pros and Cons

Expensive Medical College  seat- Is it worth it?

NEET- Not so Neat- percentile system

The  Myth  of  cost of  spending  on  medical  education needs to be made  transparent.

Exorbitantly expensive medical education and lowered merit

SC Rejects Greedy decision by Govt & Private Medical College-Fee Hike


 

    The Supreme Court set aside an Andhra Pradesh government order of 2017 prescribing a seven-fold increase in MBBS fees that made it ₹24 lakh per annum.

The Supreme Court in a judgment on Monday held that education is not a business to earn profit as it set aside an Andhra Pradesh government order of 2017 prescribing a seven-fold increase in MBBS fees that made it ₹24 lakh per annum.

Directing the private colleges to refund the amount collected in excess of the fees last fixed by the state government in 2011, a bench of justices MR Shah and Sudhanshu Dhulia said, “Education is not the business to earn profit. The tuition fee shall always be affordable.”

The order came on a petition filed by the Narayana Medical College challenging a September 2019 decision of the Andhra Pradesh high court striking down the fee increase and ordering refund to students admitted in the college since the academic year 2017-18. The apex court dismissed the petition with cost of ₹5 lakh to be borne equally by the petitioner college and state government and deposited in court within six weeks. The amount was directed for use in legal services by the Supreme Court Mediation and Conciliation Committee and the National Legal Services Authority.

The top court agreed with the conclusion made by the high court and said, “To enhance the fee to ₹24 lakh per annum, I.e., seven times more than the fee fixed earlier was not justifiable at all.” The aggrieved medical students who had to pay through their nose had said that the government order raising the fees issued on September 6, 2017 was done without awaiting the recommendation of the Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (AFRC).

The bench held the order passed by the state government to be “wholly impermissible and most arbitrary”. The court even went to the extent of saying that the hike was done “only with a view to favour or oblige the private medical colleges.”

“Any enhancement of the tuition fee without the recommendation of the AFRC shall be contrary to the decision of this court in case of P.A Inamdar in 2005 and the relevant provisions of the 2006 AFRC Rules (prevailing in the state). The high court has rightly quashed and set aside the GO dated September 6, 2017.”

The students pointed out that in 2011, the tuition fee hike was introduced by the state after consulting AFRC. However, in 2019, the state acted solely on representations received from private medical colleges. Rule 4 of the Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (for Professional Courses offered in Private, Unaided Professional Institutions) Rules, 2006 mandated the state to seek a prior report from AFRC before altering the fee.

This rule required AFRC to factor in the location of the institution, nature of professional course, cost of available infrastructure, expenditure on administration and maintenance, reasonable surplus required for growth and development of the institution, revenue foregone on account of waiver of fee in respect of students from reserved category or economically weaker sections (EWS) of the society.

The top court said, “Determination of fee/review of fee shall be within the parameters of the fixation rules and shall have the direct nexus on the factors mentioned in Rule 4 of the 2006 Rules…the state government enhanced the tuition fee at an exorbitant rate of ₹24 lakh per annum, almost seven times the tuition fee notified for the previous block period.”

The next question arose regarding refund as ordered by the high court in its order of September 24, 2019. The high court said that the colleges cannot take benefit of the unjust enrichment in fees that was wrongly increased. Accordingly, it asked the colleges to refund the students after adjusting the amounts payable under the earlier fee structure recommended by AFRC and issued in June 2011.

The bench upheld this part of the high court order and said, “The medical colleges are the beneficiaries of the illegal GO which is rightly set aside by the high court.” The bench was conscious of the hardships faced by students who arranged to pay the amount by obtaining loan from banks and financial institutions at high rate of interest. “The management cannot be permitted to retain the amount recovered or collected pursuant to the illegal GO,” it held.

The college told the Supreme Court that between 2011 and 2017, they incurred added expenses due to the requirement introduced in 2016 to pay stipend to students even as the fee remained unchanged since 2011. The bench told the college that this component would be compensated as and when the higher tuition fee is fixed by AFRC. However, the court did not permit the college to retain the illegally collected amount.

     Advantages-Disadvantage of being a doctor

     25 factors- why health care is expensive

REEL Heroes Vs Real Heroes

 21 occupational risks to doctors and nurses

Covid paradox: salary cut for doctors other paid at home

   Medical-Consumer protection Act- Pros and Cons

Expensive Medical College  seat- Is it worth it?

NEET- Not so Neat- percentile system

The  Myth  of  cost of  spending  on  medical  education needs to be made  transparent.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑