Doctor condemns mandatory service in the SUS (Brazilian public healthcare system).
Miguel Srougi, a tenured professor at USP (University of São Paulo), praised part of the "Mais Médicos" (More Doctors) program launched yesterday by the government, but says he is against creating a law: "not even military service is totally mandatory; a person can cite personal or religious reasons and not do it."
247 The 'More Doctors' program launched by the government yesterday aims to bring professionals to underserved regions.
This went against the medical community. The Federal Council of Medicine (CFM), the Brazilian Medical Association (AMB), the National Association of Resident Physicians (ANMR), and the National Federation of Physicians (Fenam) issued a statement contesting the initiative.read here).
The provisional measure also establishes the opening of 11.447 places in medical schools by 2017 and, starting in 2015, increases the curriculum of public and private medical schools by two years, with training focused on primary care (1st year) and emergency and urgent care sectors (2nd year).
During this period, students will have temporary authorization to practice medicine and will receive a stipend to provide care within the Brazilian public health system (SUS).
According to urologist Miguel Srougi, a full professor at USP (University of São Paulo), the problem with the proposal lies in the issue of mandatory testing. Read excerpts from... interview given to Folha:
Changes in medical courses
Philosophically, I find the idea very appealing. There is a debt owed by individuals who study medicine in public schools; this happened to me as well.
In some way, giving back to society the privilege we have had is very important.
But from what I've seen, it needs to be better designed. It involves changing the curriculum of all faculties. I don't know to what extent this infringes on university autonomy.
Obligatoriness
I think it's complicated to create a law forcing people to do certain things. Even military service isn't entirely mandatory; a person can cite personal or religious reasons and not participate.
This increase in the course length to eight years can also be complicated. The student will need another three or four years for residency. In other words, they will spend 13 years studying. And what happens if they have a family to support?
Debate with society
This idea is philosophically sound if explored properly. But it can't be shoved down everyone's throat. These young doctors need quality instructors.
Do the teachers go to the remote areas to supervise them?
We need a broad debate with society, involving universities, the public sector, and medical societies. The government cannot impose this by force overnight.