For graduates of Delhi government-funded medical schools, the government, led by Lieutenant-Governor V.K. Saxena, has instituted a one-year service commitment. According to this guideline, postgraduate students—including those enrolled in super-specialty courses—must sign a bond for ₹20 lakhs at the time of admission, while undergraduate medical students must sign a bond for ₹15 lakhs. The bonds will be lost if these students decide not to participate in the required one-year service requirement in government hospitals.
In an effort to alleviate the chronic physician shortage in the capital, this move is scheduled to go into effect in the upcoming academic year. The order states that current medical school graduates will have the option to work as junior residents (JR) or senior residents (SR) in various hospitals under the Government of the National Capital Territory (GNCT) of Delhi until the service bond is fully implemented, as long as they meet the specified compensation criteria.
There has been a great deal of criticism around the adoption of this service bond, especially among medical student associations. The directive has been denounced by the Federation of Resident Doctors’ Association (FORDA), which has called it “regressive.” FORDA voiced its dissatisfaction in a post on X (formerly Twitter), claiming that the imposition of this bond is in opposition to national initiatives aimed at repealing such regulations. They contend that because the bond’s financial burden may have a big influence on students’ choices of courses and specializations, it puts unfair pressure on them to make those decisions.
FORDA President Aviral Mathur expressed worries that this approach would make pre-existing problems worse. He pointed out that other states with severe doctor shortages had previously used service bonds; yet, he emphasized that Delhi is not going through a similar issue at the moment because there are plenty of job prospects in state hospitals.
The policy’s opponents contend that because prospective medical students could be reluctant to commit to a year of service under financial hardship, the mandated service bond could discourage them from enrolling in Delhi programs. They argue that the bond would actually be detrimental to the healthcare system since it would deter gifted people from pursuing professions in medicine because of the high financial risks involved.
To summarize, the introduction of a one-year service bond by the Delhi government for medical graduates has sparked a substantial discussion regarding healthcare policy, student rights, and the most effective approaches to addressing the physician shortage in metropolitan regions. The effects of this strategy on Delhi’s healthcare accessibility and the medical community will continue to be important areas of focus as it develops.
SOURCE :
THE HINDU
