RM100 million down the drain
posted in - Dobbs, - General |Reported in the NST:
This is a story of money down the drain. As many as 100 Malaysians educated in Ireland at a cost of between RM60 million and RM100 million to become doctors have turned their backs on the country. If this news is not depressing enough, there are suggestions that they are encouraging other Malaysian students not to return home but to make a living in Europe’s fastest growing economy.
This discovery was made by Health Minister Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek who recently visited the Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland and University College Dublin in Ireland, where more than 1,000 Malaysians are pursuing undergraduate or post-graduate programmes in medicine.
“They have not only evaded the compulsory service and the government bond but have become a bad influence on other Malaysians pursuing medical degrees overseas,” he said. Many of the 100 doctors studied on Mara scholarships.
Dr Chua said his information was gleaned from discussions he had with Malaysian students last month. The 100 doctors had been working in Ireland, mainly doing locum, for between one and 11 years.
I wonder if you felt as shocked and apppalled as I did when I read this in the news. Knowing we have a shortage of doctors in the country, here are 100 doctors trained overseas courtesy of our Government, unwilling to come back and serve the 10 years (3 years compulsory service and 7 years bond) they agreed to when they took up the scholarships. What is MARA doing about it? Surely the doctors or their families/guarantors should be made to pay back the scholarship money and if not, taken to court for not fulfilling the condition of their bond. Dr Chua said he would bring up this issue to the Cabinet’s attention and we sincerely hope that something concrete will be done about this. Otherwise the Government is literally pouring millions down the drain to train these ungrateful and irresponsible doctors.
Related link:
Scholarship doctors should do postgrad studies locally
Related MMR post:
Training abroad: are you coming home?
Last 5 posts by dobbs
- Seminar & Workshop on Immunohistochemistry - August 2nd, 2010
- Insider’s Guide to Passing MRCP(UK) PACES - June 11th, 2010
- A Seminar on Soft Tissue Tumours - May 16th, 2010
- 2010 MSQH International Conference and Exhibition - February 25th, 2010
- Gong Xi Fa Cai - February 14th, 2010
April 21st, 2006 at 9:43 am
I most sincerely apologise to people to whom I have caused offence, it was neither my intent or desire to do so, perhaps being so entangled in my own situation I have failed to be adequately tactful with regard to the feelings of others vis a vis the work permit issue (although I alone cannot be accused of insensitivity on this forum), for this again, sorry.
I did not mean to flaunt Permanant residency, I did not think it was such a big deal when it is so easy to obtain, personally I think the measure is largely window dressing although I thought it would be welcomed by those who call us traitors (or whichever pithy epithet) to discourage our ‘evil’ ways.
Santa has been indeed been bitten, but I offer him a plaster and do not wish to jeapordise any other students ambitions. I do find it puzzling that my decision is decried for taking the money and running and then my ‘flaunting’ of residencing status at the expense of other malaysian expats is also decried.
Which is it? Should they/we be allowed to work abroad or not? What you mean is only those well off enough to have non-govt funded education should be allowed to work overseas unhindered but not poorer scholars that had to work hard to achieve what little they have – they are forever wedded to the state. Either none of us should be allowed to work abroad or we all should – I never said I didn’t want to pay, just can’t all at once – I’m not a thief.
I know my posts have taken the form of a whinging, oppressed and downtroden victim, but hopefully I have never tried to absolve myself of any blame in this situation but instead tried to mitigate my actions in the face of much right-wing simplicity.
As for “if your contract is with the UK govt., you would probably be sent to jail by now” demonstrates your lack of understanding as to how a compassionate and equitable society works, the reason I don’t wish to return is to live amongst such atitudes, but I’ve said all this before and cannot hope to further illuminate a closed mind.
I am due to start a registrar (ENT) post in Aug and hope to continue my ‘emotional highs’ whilst working toward an amicable resolution of the situation, if such a solution eludes me perhaps I can return home and shout for all expats to be forced to return too (it shouldn’t be long until I am assimilated and indoctrinated after all).
Anyway best wishes to all of you, even the most venomous, in all that you do and save your invective for someone more prone to give it more serious consideration.
April 21st, 2006 at 10:06 am
Nota Bene
I had considered, if compelled to return, ‘unintentionally becoming’ unfit to practice medicine to absolve me of my responsibilities, but alas even this is covered by the insidious millstone around my neck and I would still need to repay.
Please do not take this comment as some throwaway attempt to find a loophole, but rather as a guage as to the strength of my feeling, that I could consider giving up a career which I love very much just to get my life back. As it is, such an action would be a pointless and spitefull gesture, a phyrric victory perhaps, so is not worthy of further deliberation.
p.s.
Also that comment about getting A’s being nothing more than ordinary here (MMR) is annoying me, because I have never once said I was better, brighter, or more deserving of anyone else and nor do I think so. Furthermore I would not wish to take anything from those students that regard their results as a significant personal achievement of some kind, to those – well done, to everyone else, I salute your achievements however easy or difficult it may have been.
April 21st, 2006 at 10:33 am
Dr Ng, FYI, there is a well set up international network of willing “marriage” partners (for a fee of course) which has been operating for many years. Malaysians are not the only creative loophole bypassers
The real issues are i. one’s own conscience (those of us who have inhabited modern Bolehland would have been exposed to sufficient extraneous stimuli to have this minimised) ii. practicality in the pursuit of one’s profession in a desired way
Those of us who are global citizens understand that a new global order exists with a well trained and well qualified professional being truly internationally mobile
April 21st, 2006 at 10:37 am
I do not think that ngchmd is in full possesion of the facts with regard to the current state of the NHS here in the UK. Yes there is overspending about £800 millions which will necessitate some cuts in services, but this is out of a budget of £92 billions. Also most of this overspend is in a very concentrated number of poorly managed NHS trusts, who, as you said, attribute much of the overspend to the huge increases in doctors salaries as well as an ever increasing drugs bill.
Most GP’s and consultants are alledged to be paid between 70k to 100k per annum, although there have been recent press reports of some GP’s earning up to 250k per annum (all figures are for NHS work, private income streams inevitably increase the salaries significantly).
I believe that the number of doctors employed in the NHS is likely to continue to increase, although perhaps more slowly than in recent years and although this will have an impact on demand, it is not solely funding that has neccessitated this change (work permits). The enlargement of the EU (and the resultant freedom of movement therein) has widened the supply of qualified DR’s for the NHS whilst at the same time an increase in numbers of students in UK medical schools (who will soon graduate) has put pressure on training positions and led to the demands for non EU citizens or non UK trained medics to be barred from getting jobs (where there is an alternative acceptable candidate). I belive this move is aimed primarily at those doctors who are from/have trained in the Indian subcontinent, a group that seem to ‘invade’ the NHS in increasingly large numbers every year (some of whom have been working for free to get training posts!).
My opinion is that it is not a ‘funding crisis’ that are the cause of the NHS’ problems (funding has tripled in the last decade) but poor management that often accompanies state run enterprises, as well as constant diktats from the DoH that seem to change priorities every week.
April 21st, 2006 at 5:49 pm
The tenets of the UK NHS reform are as listed below. These were discussed in the BBC aired by Astro recently.
#########
http://society.guardian.co.uk/publicfinances/story/0,,1752218,00.html
100,000 jobs will vanish in health reforms, says thinktank
John Carvel, social affairs editor
Wednesday April 12, 2006
The Guardian
At least 100,000 NHS employees will lose their jobs if the government carries through the health reforms Tony Blair wants as a lasting monument to his premiership, according to a report today from the pro-market thinktank Reform.
…..
Professor Bosanquet, who is an adviser to the Commons health committee, blamed Department of Health planners for pushing up staffing costs. Since 1999 the NHS workforce had increased from 1 million to 1.3 million, and was on course to reach 1.6 million by 2010, he said. But the reforms being pursued by the health secretary, Patricia Hewitt, would make trusts think harder about productivity; foundation hospitals would negotiate local pay deals, and as more trusts gained foundation status, national pay agreements would become less important.
“It is likely that productivity gains will mean that staff numbers are reduced by at least 10%,” Prof Bosanquet said. This would cut the workforce to below 1.2 million. “The combination of a doubling in the number of medical trainees, the low level of retirement and a very tight financial environment, means there is likely to be severe medical unemployment in coming years.”
April 22nd, 2006 at 2:12 am
I conceed that reforms that result in productivity gains may well result in a tightening of the market as descirbed previously, that is providing such productivity gains can be realised. If they are, it is a good thing for resources to be used more productively but as we all know Governments aren’t the best managers of resources. There is also the general public to consider. Their insatiable appetite for ever more medical resources means that even with increases in productivity in some areas the demand does not weaken.
After saying all this with no quote to back me up, I will conceed the accuracy of your post with a hope that what I see and feel on the ground continues to equate to an increasing demand for our servcices.
Until then, I stand corrected.
April 22nd, 2006 at 5:28 am
We may be digressing from the thread – but just returning to the issue of dissatisfaction by some on the tangible use of local resources (ie. people’s tax money) on scholars who default, let us look at the picture from a bird’s eye general economics point of view.
Adam Smith, the Scots economist propounded the thesis which led to the formulation of the law of unintended consequences. Briefly, he argues that we have bread on our table not because of the benovelence of the baker but that the baker needed to earn a living. By the same argument, we could see that the government might have a motive for sending large numbers of scholars overseas to study undergraduate medicine. Whatever this may be beats me as this continues to be debated in many fora.
The issue is that there may be another ‘hidden’ motive and this is related to the many non transparent things the government does including plans to build the ‘crooked bridge’ to link Singapore.
Because of their non transparency, hidden agendas, or even perhaps plainly ‘no idea what is going on’ their actions have led to an unintended outcome, say in the case of Yummy, a change of plans.
There are economic implications linked to these grandiose plans both for the country, the tax payers and also the scholar. Things are not so simple.
To end, there may also be a link with Nobel Prize winner, Amartya Sen’s hypothesis on famines and entitlements. Yes, famines, implied by, Sen do not occur where there are strong democracies, even in the poorest countries. A famine as we all know, can be a natural disaster esp in agarian communities – but, Sen has convincingly shown that in strong democracies, even in poor agarian communities, this does not happen.
Laterally thinking and applying this to our original argument on this thread….would the situation with scholars occured in the first place if the government had planned and subsequently managed properly?
The famine model and entitlement/hoarding can also be applied to policies on how wealth is controlled and distrubuted by the same continuing Bolehland government through its long history of clinging to power.
So, who is really to blame?
Quod erat demonstrandum
References:
http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/jod/10.3sen.html
http://finance.sauder.ubc.ca/~bhatta/BookReview/arrow_on_sen‘s_poverty_and_famine.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/saturday_review/story/0,3605,465796,00.html
April 22nd, 2006 at 6:40 am
[...] But I want to tell you this, I will never call the society that supported my education and changed my life 'backwards and insular'. I will never call that society 'medieval'. I am forever grateful to that society for bringing me up and given me what I have today. Even if I repay the scholarship, I will still consider myself indebt to that society, because really what they have given me cannot be repaid in monetary terms. What was said by this scholar in the MMR was so shameful, but she seems to have no shame and so self-righteous. I want to tell people back home that not all scholars are like that. [...]
April 22nd, 2006 at 7:32 am
>>I want to tell people back home that not all scholars are like that. […] >>
I agree. Unlike Yummy, the majority conform, comply or “obey” the contract they signed.
Yummy has been open in her discussion and her situation is quite intriquing. I think it is right to hear her views – however “palatable” or “unpalatable” her remarks maybe to some.
Earlier in the postings, we realise that Yummy’s predicament is her own making (I hope she agrees on this point). However, there is her argument that the terms to get out of her contract (a fair option in all reasonable contracts) is not fair (shifting goal-post). Appropriately, she has sought legal advice on this.
#####
Some definitions:
Conformity refers to any behaviour you perform because of group pressure, even though that pressure might not involve direct requests.
Compliance is a kind of conformity in which we give in to social pressure in our public responses but do not change our private beliefs.
Obedience refers to performing some behaviour in response to an order given by someone in a position of power or authority.
April 22nd, 2006 at 9:51 am
Dr Ng, to be fair again to Yummy, you appear to have unilaterally concluded that Yummy’s circumstances are her own making, without knowing the full facts. Like a strip teaser, she has not fully revealed all. So, watch this thread!
Otherwise, I agree with you that we have to listen to her views and her arguments as I have always been open about. This is the difference between an open mind and one which is influenced and manipulated and managed by “big brother”
To slightly digress, I guess in these Orwellian times, those in power think they could manipulate, forcefully manage and control the profession: so, beware and watch your butts doctors! (I do not think I am paranoid yet – the evidence is there for all to see)
April 22nd, 2006 at 5:46 pm
>>To slightly digress, I guess in these Orwellian times, those in power think they could manipulate, forcefully manage and control the profession: so, beware and watch your butts doctors! (I do not think I am paranoid yet – the evidence is there for all to see)
>>
LF: You are not only hardy, but also,
>>If you wish to consider coming and be a Resident (sorry, no Registrars as this is College controlled), write to me in Oz”>>
helpful.
It is not unexpected that Yummy’s case provoked many emotional responses. Finally, she determines her own destiny and I wish her well.
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:22 am
@ngchmd
Here is something for you and all, (tongue in cheek of course!):
“Facts are facts and will not disappear on account of your likes.” (Nehru)
and
“Baloney is the lie laid on so thick you hate it. Blarney is flattery laid on so thin you love it.”
(F Sheen)
and
There is a stone there,
That whoever kisses,
Oh, he never misses
To grow eloquent.
‘Tis he may clamber
To a lady’s chamber,
Or become a member
Of Parliament.
Every kissed the Blarney stone?
April 23rd, 2006 at 7:40 am
LF: Yes, kissed the Blarney stone in the town of Killarney (Eire) and has the cert to prove it.
Decisions made after carefully thinking about all the alternatives and striking a balance between human rights and laws of society represents the highest level of moral reasoning. (Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning).
In any society, it is the actions by the non-conformist, the non-compliant and the disobedient (badly termed the unreasonable) ones who may hasten change. : ) You may choose to return in the future to make the difference, besides contributing to the productivity of the country.
April 23rd, 2006 at 12:14 pm
There you go! Dr Ng CH has indeed kissed the Blarney stone
I have yet to, so my chances of becoming an MP are zilch even if I chose to
April 23rd, 2006 at 2:43 pm
This is how you kiss the underside of the Blarney stone.
http://www.sacredsites.com/europe/ireland/blarney_stone.html
Echoing the power of the stone, an Irish bard of the early nineteenth century, Francis Sylvester Mahony, wrote:
There is a stone there,
That whoever kisses,
Oh, he never misses
To grow eloquent.
‘Tis he may clamber
To a lady’s chamber,
Or become a member
Of Parliament.
It was obvious that my wishes were not granted. : ))
April 23rd, 2006 at 2:50 pm
>>It was obvious that my wishes were not granted. : )) >>
Correction. It is obvious that my wishes have yet to be granted. Life is more fun this way. : )
April 24th, 2006 at 5:42 am
That’s positive thinking for you – it is called ‘hope’
I wish everyone in Bolehland, all the hope they can imagine. I also wish Yummy the hope of resolving her unusual situation amicably.
April 24th, 2006 at 7:55 am
Just read the whole thread!
Apart consistent objective analyses put through by LF Ng, everyone else sounds spiteful? Am sure there is no need for this.
Yummy, you go baby!
Remember what our professor used to say; You only live once, if you do it right, once is enough (Damon Runyon).
April 24th, 2006 at 8:10 am
(Now how rude was I earlier), So, if I may introduce myself;
Yummy’s shopping mate.
Another traitor (seems like a favourite word repeatedly used to refer to people like us).
Another ENT boffin.
Similar story, without the husband.
April 24th, 2006 at 8:27 am
>>Just read the whole thread!
…. everyone else sounds spiteful? Am sure there is no need for this.>>
Spite: malice, ill will; a desire to hurt
It is easy to express such an opinion and you are certainly self-opinionated. Your opinion will be more credible should you have offered your views to back it up.
Yummy is brave to bring her problems to MMR. Does she really think that there will only be one view – unconditional positve regard – in support of her views. Anyway, this problem of Yummy requires negotiation and resolution with the body that awarded her generous (1 million ringgit) scholarship – and does not concern involve the others directly in MMR. Many, as did Yummy, expressed their views (palatable or unpalatable). I am sure those who have read the discussion will find sufficient guide and help in sorting out their similar predicament. The final decision is hers and hers alone. What is so spiteful here?
Keep your opinion to yourself, however, your contributions if any is welcomed.
April 24th, 2006 at 8:56 am
>>Just read the whole thread!
Apart consistent objective analyses put through by LF Ng, everyone else sounds spiteful? Am sure there is no need for this.
>>
LF: This is worrying. Your postings have been interpreted as unconditional positive support by some of these scholars who bust their scholarship contracts. Maybe you should give your comprehensive views on these to guide them further. Are your views expressed so far specific to Yummy’s case only? How should these scholars who are signing these contract presently be careful of? Is there a trap behind the bait which they should be aware of?
April 24th, 2006 at 10:01 am
If you are happy with the condition of your society, Govt., etc., the you will think that my (perhaps overly provocative) description is not justified. I conceed I owe much to our society but cannot discount from what I have seen elsewhere in the world that I may have achieved much more, with less personal cost, had our society been more European or Anglo Saxon with the opportunities that those societies tend to impart (before this elicits a reply I admit this may be hyperbole).
I am happy to hear most other views and to have mine dissected by thorough argument but I do believe that mindless and moralistic pontification serves no purpose in the advancement of ideas or society.
Whilst I concede that I have played a part in the design of my current predicament, I tend to think that this has been largely as an understudy rather than in the lead role (or supporting actor at least). Despite your (ngchmd) marginally less conservative responses of late, your continued intransigence makes me despair for the prospect of reform in our country.
I think spiteful was a little harsh, I do not feel too maligned by most of the vacuous (LFng/ngchmd excepted) comments on here but I do think it demonstates how both sides of an argument may feel about rash and ill conceived conjecture (sorry jimmy, i’ll buy you a latte).
April 24th, 2006 at 10:02 am
@ngchmd: you are correct in stating that my views may be misinterpreted as support by those who break their bond. My views were related to interpretation of the scenario based on information given and information which I have acquired. In the absence of views proferred by the government or their agents, it is difficult for anyone who is neutral to offer any guidance. I am not in the position to do so as I do not have locus standii. I do not need to spend time explaining to others if they had misinterpreted my postings as unconditional support for the scholars.
What I unconditionally support are the principles of natural justice, integrity, and also the spirit of the French revolution
(liberte, fraternite et egalite)
April 24th, 2006 at 10:17 am
I would not presume to speak for LF but I do not think the position taken could be interpreted as unconditional support for scholars that bust their contracts. My interpretation would be of someone with an open mind that is not too quick to judge people when not in posession of all the facts.
I think to suggest such a thing in reference to a light-hearted comment is a disingenuous position to take. From the previous responses you have given I think you know this to be true and said this to emotively elicit further support for your cause.
April 24th, 2006 at 12:19 pm
>> ngchmd Says:
April 10th, 2006 at 11:34 am
Yummy: The number of students who abuse the terms of the scholarships given to them to acquire an overseas medical degree is large, probably increasing and worrying. The discussions in MMR look at this problem in general. There are many parties involved here – the government and the scholarship awarding bodies, the taxpayers, the general public who uses the MOH hospitals and healthcare facilities, the existing doctors in MOH and of course the scholarship recipients and their guarantors. You may wish to contribute your views in a more constructive manner. >>
Well folks. That was an interesting discussion. I would term this constructive.
We had a chance to explore the views of various sides. The scholars, who were non-conforming or non-compliant, are perhaps surprised by the strong feelings expressed by others. Likewise, we gather some ideas on the bitterness of these scholars and why some of them have chosen to behave thus. From the newspaper report, there are at least a 100 scholars involved; Yummy is not alone. She is courageous and honest enough to discuss her predicament in MMR.
But you are arguing your case with the government, which is an organization that is, large, bureaucratic, slow in making decisions, regulated by the rules and laws, faceless and inflexible to an individual case; this situation is not peculiar only to Malaysia.
The questions to ponder further:
Perhaps, the government should be faulted for putting our top scholars in these situations.
Perhaps, the government should be faulted for not managing these scholarships better.
Perhaps, the government should be faulted for sending our top scholars overseas for undergraduate education.
Perhaps, the government should be faulted for being too inflexible in their pursuit of those scholars who are non-conforming or non-compliant. Will they, not then be opened to accusations of inefficiency and poor management?
Perhaps, the government should be faulted for not been strict with the scholars by imposing the full term of the contracts with no exceptions. Will they, not then be accused of inflexibility, non-caring, authoritarian and the likes?
Perhaps, these scholarships should be channeled to build up our local tertiary undergraduate education facilities instead.
Perhaps, these scholarships are better used to send our top scholars to do postgraduate (PhD, research, fellowships) in good learning centers.
Finally, it boils down to an individual’s arguments in support of his/her position based on the level of his/her moral reasoning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development
April 24th, 2006 at 12:45 pm
Please continue discussion in the MMR Forums
TQ
http://forum.malaysianmedicine.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=575
April 25th, 2006 at 3:09 am
[...] There’s been so much talk about JPA (PSD) scholars returning home, serving their 10 years bond that the kpo in me thinks I should blog about it as well. There’s 76 comments post in MMR, there’re letters at UK Doc’s and also on the topic of JPA scholarships, though not about bond-serving, Richard writes on Rags to Riches. [...]
July 28th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
It all boils down to a govt that is half pass six and have been so for a very long time.
Added to this is an electorate that is masochistic and you’ll have potent brew for disaster!
February 16th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Dear LF et al,
>>“Facts are facts and will not disappear on account of your likes.” (Nehru),,
“If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts.” (Albert Einstein)
In life, evry thing can be relative.
Happy Chinese New Year to all.
Yours,
CT Goh