We have been bombarded with numerous and spurious strikes by the GMOA in the issue of SAITM. There are many schools of thought, stemming mainly from privatization of US that such privatizations will lead to heavy loans, indebtedness, taxes etc. As a result, there is a phobia generated that this is a headway for ‘losing free education’!
I am for privatization, but not losing free education.’ There should be a mix of private and state institutions, which de facto moves towards a bettered and challenging mix when the standard of living goes up. This should apply to the medical field also. My arguments for such a mix of privatization don’t stem from the US, but from our neighbouring countries, such as India, Bangladesh, Australia, China and Japan. They host our students in their private and state run universities.
Why I am for privatization, for the medical field also?
We witness wildcat strikes, protests, unlawful acts (not respecting court decisions) etc. in almost all state-run institutions. Would this lead the country to development, increase our GDP? I believe, because there is so much free service, the value of ‘service’ is disregarded; the value of what is paid to them with the tax of hard earning, goes unrealized. When people pay for something, let it be even little, it adds to the value of it. Limitations in intakes to state medical universities leave hundreds of thousands of capable people out every year, as was also recently cited by the President, with statistics. Should they all go abroad? And should our reserves be spent on foreign countries? Why not a private medical university in our country to facilitate their learning here?
There are private institutions in almost every realm, such as, technology, management, admin etc, so why not for Medical too? I would advocate for the government to provide bank loan facilities for capable students who are unable to enter state universities, so that they can enter private medical universities and proceed with their studies. This is practised in many countries.
The quality of the private medical university is an issue to be addressed. But it must be addressed by a non-stakeholder; not by a state medical institution or the GMOA. Even inferior quality institutions can produce the best of products. Nearly two decades ago, during the peak of war, the Jaffna Medical Faculty lacked facilities, including lecturers, besides many others. Following the assassination of Dr. Rajini Thiranagama, there was a dearth of qualified staff. But from there stemmed a student who topped the rank island-wide and some of the best doctors now in Colombo, are from that era from that University! Quality products don’t depend solely on the system, but also those who go through the system. And, the quality of both, state and private medical institutions should be assessed - not so much as competitors to condemn one over the other, but to facilitate to share resources, etc.
While there is a serious ‘brain-drain’ of Sri Lankan graduates, dominantly in the medical field from those who passed out from state universities - who got everything free (including Mahapola Scholarship); on the other hand, there are ‘committed’ graduates, doctors, who spend for education from their own resources, who have returned to Sri Lanka, gone through the waiting and ERPM and serve in the Island – mostly in remote places. SAITM too, who knows, may produce such dedicated doctors, who are genuine to the Hippocratic Oath they take.
The current outcry against SAITM is more a political drive than a contemplated move on the field of medicine. Where were all ‘these’ anti-SAITMers (including GMOA) when SAITM was established and inaugurated by the previous government? Did SAITM change with the government change? It is alarming and saddening to note the ‘thuggery’ style mindset of the GMOA to strike and put the common people into difficulty. They have struck work for personal interests, such as, schooling for their children / permit for vehicles etc.; they have poked their nose into matters outside their concern too! (E.g. their vociferous expletives and strikes against ETCA). All these show that anti-SAITM propaganda is for everything, except concerns on genuine issues related to the medical field.
The Medical sector is an honourable service sector. It is a danger to make state institutions the sole custodian of it. That would lead to mafia styled monopoly, as also exhibited by the GMOA recently, on releasing a mafia style report that there is scarcity of a drug when in fact it was not so. Sri Lanka has a rich heritage of indigenous medicine, also, with such potential capability even to export their products. Such developments are, not because of state run ‘ayurvedic’ hospitals that are visited more by its employees than patients, but by private ‘ayurvedic’ institutions; even countries around us know our Sidhalepe products. Hence, the medical field in Sri Lanka cannot be the sole custody of a state run medical institution that is the exclusive stakeholder of western medicine. To offer ‘free’ facilities, where does the government get resources from? We still have many ‘complacent’ state institutions ‘manned’ by people for whom it is more a ‘secure’ job than challenging them to the mandate of the trade, to serve, to research, to develop etc. for the common / country’s good. To offer more such ‘free’ facilities, year by year the government gets loans and ‘grants’ from others who grant for their own vested interests. Are we advocating for the country to continue this trend?
Already we witness that almost all qualified doctors, who qualify on state expenses, give better service in their private practices and use the state hospitals only as their pastime. Many who strike and make the state hospitals suffer, continue their loyal service at private hospitals! This pathetic attitude and practice need to be challenged and changed. I see SAITM as such a challenge which is why the GMOA is agitating so much against it. SAITM has challenged a monopoly.
So, I advocate for a mix of state and private medical universities, a neutral body to oversee both and guide them in the proper sharing of resources and lead the way to further advancement of the medical field, not neglecting the ‘ayurvedic’ wing as well. University students should not just swallow the phobia of those with vested interests, but see the the positives of privatization which is the right hallmark of a ‘university’, i.e., “a whole community of teachers and scholars” – which focuses on thinking; if not, they will become a “community driven by charismatic” – far from thinking but by basal emotions.
S. K. Xavier
(Engineering graduate
from Peradeniya University)