The first article is from Norman Sartorius, who directly questions the validity and ethical status of the commentary on this recruitment policy provided by Catherine Jenkins. The statement which has caused him particular concern (and is quoted by all three authors) concerns the response of the Indian Minister of Health and Family Welfare to a parliamentary question on the issue -- to the effect that 'the overall availability of doctors in India is sufficient'. It is worth noting that the Department of Health has also explained that the government of India has indicated it has a 'surplus of nurses'. Unfortunately, it is unclear on what basis these assurances were made. However, Professor Srinivasa Murthy makes much the same point, and he goes on to add a challenge to the Royal College of Psychiatrists (UK), by asking -- how can the College believe it is acting ethically by supporting the International Fellowship Programme? We turn to the response by Gareth Holsgrove for an explanation. As I understand his argument, he regards the recruitment plan as 'ethical' for a variety of reasons. First, longstanding lack of strategic planning in the UK has ensured we do not have sufficient trained doctors to service our population's needs. Second, doctors in those parts of the developing world from which we recruit are underpaid, and cannot necessarily find jobs even when appropriately qualified for them. Clearly, if the placements in the UK did offer appropriate training opportunities and were time limited, much of the heat would be taken out of the debate.
