FrontPoint Systems Ltd

Discrimination has been an ugly fact of life in the NHS, against any group that does not conform to the way the people running the show think we ought to be. Discrimination has been documented against gay & lesbian doctors, against women and against candidates from ethnic minorities. It runs the gamut from fewer minority students being selected to medical school to the fact that doctors from these communities are usually relegated to the less popular specialities, do not get promoted to leadership positions & receive far fewer merit awards or indeed have more cases referred to the GMC as compared to other groups even when adjusted for similar initial levels of complaint.

What has been especially blatant over the past year has been the attempt to discard from the UK training schemes, the thousands of doctors of overseas origin, many from the Indian subcontinent who have been propping up the health service in huge numbers. They are the ones taking posts in unpopular specialities like A&E, geriatrics, psychiatry and O&G to keep the service running on the off chance that they would obtain a higher training post in open competition. The Royal Colleges pay mealy-mouthed service to the claim of fairness when they have over the years discriminated against & sabotaged these very same doctors.

Not-withstanding the public posturing in the aftermath of the disgraceful way in which permit-free training was abolished & overseas doctors were asked to leave, many of whom had made lives in this country for a number of years, the deaneries, the Royal Colleges & significant sections of the establishment had been aware of & had collaborated in that shameful treatment.

Let us be very clear about one thing: The NHS is institutionally racist & this problem extends to the top. There is lip service paid to the concept of equal treatment but behind the scenes, acts of omission & commission continue to disadvantage staff from minority communities.

I was concerned about the reference in the initial review terms to IMGs & the status of people with HSMP visas.

I can see no reason why in the aftermath of the High Court judgement & the commitment from the DoH that doctors with the appropriate visas would be treated as per the law, there was a need for this to be included in the review. Scape-goating third parties appears to be a favourite trick at the top. The same trick was tried recently with the appointments to the Foundation years, unfortunately successfully.

I repeat from a previous post:

Dr Edwin Borman, chair of the BMA International Committee, says: “The government’s recent treatment of overseas doctors has been very disappointing. They were given the impression that they’d be able to contribute to the NHS, and spend their whole careers in the UK, then the rules changed overnight and many were forced to leave. The failure of the government to consult with the medical profession meant that they had little opportunity to prepare to leave the country.”

J.M. Purcell, a senior doctor based in Carlisle, said: “In essence, this means that doctors I have seen invest time, commitment and resources in the NHS stand to lose the opportunity to continue training here with no warning or chance to alter their plans.

“It will mean that doctors who have dedicated themselves to the NHS and begun to study for their UK postgraduate exams who were born in India will be second choice to a Polish doctor who has no experience of the NHS.

“I have profound concerns about this unjust shift which speaks volumes about the unfair way in which the immigration system operates in the UK and the high personal cost this has for individuals”.

I think that this could do with being highlighted.

I am obliged to Dr Crippen for picking this up & for continuing to highlight the unlawful discrimination occurring in various parts of the NHS.

This letter from the president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists needs to be explained. (The original was available at the RCOG website but has since been taken down. It is now mirrored here.)

From: Anne Martin
Sent: 01 March 2007 19:13
To: ‘Carol Black’
Cc: Sabaratnam Arulkumaran; Diana Garrett (E-mail)
Subject: MTAS - FROM PROFESSOR ALLAN TEMPLETON
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential

Dear Carol

We have had much representation about MTAS in the last few days. I think we must have had 50 e-mails or so, we have asked our Deanery College Advisers for their views and most have reported problems. I enclose four representative, unsolicited e-mails, two from Fellows with knowledge of the shortlisting process and in addition an e-mail from the Chair of our Trainees Committee and one from two trainees in UCH. These are all representative of many e-mails we have received.

The main issues emerging are:-

1. That most Deaneries have been overwhelmed by the shortlisting process to the extent that selection on merit has been a fairly blunt process.

2. The completed forms have been particularly difficult to assess and score and seem incapable of allowing the identification of the more able doctors. Also they fail to identify UK graduates, which we all thought was the major purpose of MMC.

3. We are getting reports from almost all the Deaneries of able doctors keen to do obstetrics and Gynecology simply not being shortlisted, much to their surprise, and to the surprise of their supervisors. This is a particular concern in our specialty. As you know we need to do all we can to encourage UK graduates to take up O&G.

4. We are becoming aware that there are many distraught young graduates out there unclear as to their future.

Our suggestion is that we try and recover the situation, to some extent at least in the second round. We used to run a National Selection process, prior to MMC and we would like to put this in place, with the agreement of MMC prior to April. Meantime we are encouraging all those who have not been shortlisted to take advice, reapply for the second round and we will be giving them all the help and support we can.

As you know Arul will be attending the Academy in my place and is now well versed in the issues and will be pleased to speak to the problems.

Allan

Professor Allan Templeton
President
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

27 Sussex Place
Regent’s Park
London NW1 4RG
Direct Tel No: 020 7772 6228
Facsimile No: 020 7224 9550
E-mail: president@rcog.org.uk

The RCOG have refused to comment on this email & say that they will be making a statement next week.

Just what is meant by the comment about the forms not identifying the origin of the doctors? It is funny how the truth comes out in the wash. I invite those involved to consider their positions.

I have absolutely no confidence in this review & will support a legal challenge.

Share This

This entry was posted on Friday, March 16th, 2007 at 7:22 am and is filed under Clinical, NHS, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.