Exclusion of non-medical teachers by the MCI
Open letter to all the MPs in the government and in the opposition
This is to bring to your kind notice of the following facts and issues.
Indian Medical Council (IMC) Act, 1956 was passed with the aim of regulating and strengthening medical education. Medical Council of India was created under this Act.
In order to address the shortage of non-clinical doctors to teach in the pre-clinical subjects of Anatomy, Physiology & Biochemistry and the para-clinical subjects of Pharmacology & Microbiology, graduates from the science faculty were offered 3-year medical M.Sc courses in the medical colleges. The syllabus and curriculum of medical M.Sc courses are mostly similar to that of MD courses in these subjects. In the original IMC Act, medical M.Sc courses were included in the First Schedule. These courses were offered in the medical colleges after seeking permission from the MCI. In the 1980s, MCI stopped giving permission to medical colleges to run these courses. MCI now claims that it has nothing to with these courses. Despite that, over 90 medical colleges offered these courses and many continue to offer them.
As per the MCI’s current 1998 guidelines on the Teachers Eligibility and Qualifications (TEQ), persons with medical M.Sc can be appointed as teachers in these five non-clinical departments, subjected to the ceiling of 30% (50% in Biochemistry). With Ph.D. and suitable publications, they can be promoted up to the post of Professors. Since these teachers don’t hold MBBS degree, they are called ‘non-medical teachers’ even though their course is conducted by the medical college and the degree is awarded under the faculty of medicine.
Prior to the 1998 amendment of the MCI’s TEQ guidelines, these non-medical teachers could ascend to the post of Professor without the need for Ph.D. Now, one needs to have Ph.D. beyond the post of Assistant Professor. Earlier, they could head the department, now they are disallowed. Despite being eligible as per MCI guidelines, several health universities refuse to permit these non-medical teachers from rendering their academic services as examiners. Many non-clinical teachers are complaining of discriminations at work with respect to academic roles, promotions, salaries etc. This kind of academic apartheid is unacceptable.
Since persons with medical M.Sc degree study only the medical aspects of their subject like the doctors, their knowledge and skills are restricted only to the medical fields. They are unsuitable for roles & occupations outside the medical field. By virtue of their education, they are suitable to be employed as teachers in the non-clinical departments, consultants in the diagnostic laboratories or as scientists in the research institutions.
There are very limited opportunities for these biomedical scientists in research at the central or state research organizations. After the formulation of the guidelines on the diagnostic laboratories under the Clinical Establishments Act (CEA), these qualified and skilled persons have been wrongly denied their role in diagnostic laboratories. Now the MCI proposes to reduce their presence to 15% (25% in Biochemistry) and stop it after three years. What are they supposed to do if the jobs and opportunities in their field of expertise are being denied to them? There is a threat of job loss to over thousands of non-medical teachers who are already working in medical colleges. Those who are already working as consultants in labs are either being removed or demoted. It is the government’s responsibility to address their concerns.
In the Western Countries, biomedical scientists are held in high esteem; with the right training and Ph.D., they can be head or directors of diagnostic laboratories. Why is our government denying the roles for which our biomedical scientists were trained and educated? In most of the Western medical colleges teaching in the non-clinical subjects are often conducted by the non-medical teachers. In fact, many colleges don’t even offer MD courses in these non-clinical subjects; MD courses are offered only in the clinical subjects. In our country where the patient-doctor ratio is 1:1596, the society needs more doctors to attend to the patients than teach in the colleges alone.
Once included in the first schedule by the parliament, does the MCI have the authority to remove it without sanction from the parliament? Who authorized derecognition of medical M.Sc courses? When was it published in the Gazette? UGC mentions medical M.Sc as a two-year course but most medical colleges are conducting them as a 3-year course. Who is supposed to regulate and standardize these courses? Is there any council for regulating these courses and registering the persons with these degrees? How many colleges are currently conducting these courses? How many students have been produced till date with these degrees? What is the role that the government sees for these biomedical scientists? How many biomedical scientists are required for the next five years? Does this government have any policy after all? MCI has formed a subcommittee to downsize and remove non-medical teachers? Did this subcommittee seek feedback from the stakeholders? Does the health ministry approve of this subcommittee? What is the government doing to safeguard the interests of these biomedical scientists who have no redressal mechanisms for their grievances?
The government must take this matter seriously. Just because they are a minority of few thousands, their rights can’t be ignored. A committee must be formed by the ministry or the parliament to look into their grievances. They can’t be subjected to discriminations and denials of opportunities just because sufficient doctors are now available. It has come to our notice that several non-medical teachers are being sacked. Having served for decades, can they now seek a new profession? Disentitling one just to favour another is unethical and immoral. The government can’t take sides, it is responsible for all sections of the society.
These degree holders must be given their rightful place in the diagnostic laboratories by amending the CEA guidelines and their roles retained in the teaching to the extent of 30-50% in medical colleges. The government must promote research in basic medical sciences by giving importance to M.Sc / Ph.D. holders. They must be given representation in the proposed National Medical Commission to prevent further discrimination. Under no circumstances, people already in employment must be affected by the amendments. The government must either reinclude medical M.Sc degree in the first schedule and ask MCI to regulate the course or set up a new council for the medical scientists that is distinct from the paramedical or allied health professions.
This government must be questioned.
https://twitter.com/NMMTA_Assn/with_replies
