Prof. (Dr.) Ravi M. Nair
Express your opinion and creative suggestions here
All the Regulations so far formulated have been aimed at improving and standardising Homoeopathic Education in the country. Homoeopathy Central Council (Minimum Standards Requirement of Homoeopathic Colleges and attached Hospitals) Regulations 2013” came into force w.e.f. 8th March 2013.
The deadline instructions stipulated in the New Regulations are quite different and distinct from those of the previous Regulations in that no colleges shall be allowed to continue beyond 31st December 2014 if they “are not able to achieve full compliance of the requirements as specified in these Regulations”. If this is done, it would be the nailing of the coffin of almost all Homoeopathic Colleges and the existence of Homoeopathy too in this country.
The following facts and factors can reasonably and prudently be attributed to such a contingency.
The most dominant and prominent superfluous provisions that are laid down under 3 (2) & (3) of the new Regulations are about the MOU with a Super Specialty Hospital (of modern medicine) and imparting training there. But the absence of mention of the Super Specialty Hospital among the minimum standards requirements in the provisions 4-13 of the Regulations and its insistence in the Standard Inspection forms (SIF) of the CCH betray a lot of confusions confounding together to the bewilderment of the colleges as to how these stipulations contradicting themselves should be followed.
If the inspections are conducted based on the current SIF, there is no doubt that the Colleges will be rendered incapable of complying with the above requirements, thereby leading themselves to be wound up in the immediate future – anything beyond this purport will end in a state far removed from reality. Even if it is taken for granted, supposing a College manages to arrange a tie up facility with a super Specialty Hospital of modern medicine, receiving training as specified in the Regulations, no student will be attaining or achieving anything by recourse to this strange training. He would be reaching a state of confusion losing his entire conviction in Homoeopathy, ultimately becoming a physician of no worth. He would be neither competent to practice Homoeopathy nor Modern Medicine. This being the case, the logic behind the insistence of drafting BHMS students to the Super Specialty Hospital of modern medicine “to understand the depth of operative surgery and operative Gynaecology or Obstetrics as well as management of critical illness” is nothing but self ridiculous.
The next point to be discussed here relates to the strength of teaching staff in a degree college. The staff pattern given in the New Regulations is too unscientific and insufficient to carry out effective teaching in a course where there are 12 departments dealing with basic medical subjects, basic subjects of Homoeopathy and clinical subjects. The preparation of the present staff pattern seems to have been made with no due consideration to the hours of teaching mentioned in the BHMS Regulations in respect of each subject. Apart from theoretical teaching, the faculty of teaching departments of a medical college have a series of tasks to be earnestly undertaken such as practicals/clinical training and duties, conduct of tutorials, seminars, periodical examinations with vivavoce and practicals, correction of practical records/case records, assignments, preparation of mark lists and the statement of attendance etc. With this meager skeleton of staff, how can a department be expected to be run effectively and systematically simultaneously giving due consideration to their conveniences / inconveniences and relaxation (eligible leave etc.) incumbent in their service?
In the first Regulations (1983), the staff strength prescribed upto 100 students was 62 in 4 cadres. When these Regulations were amended in 2002 the above staff strength was tapered down to 43 out of which only 36 were full time. This staff strength has further been dwindled into 24 full time with 8 Guest faculty, requiring them to attend only 3 hours a week, for 60 students.
As the post of Professor is not obligatory in 8 of the 12 departments, the teachers in those departments will not have any prospects of promotion in their career. This will adversely affect and repulse talented Homoeopaths to join teaching faculty. This being the case, how can the new graduates being produced under this setup be expected to become competent medical practitioners in these trendy days in a society with enlightened elite ?
What is noticeable here is an apparent attempt at cutting the body according to the suitability of cloth, with deliberate intention in mind to serve the Regulations as a saviour to the Managements.
It is highly ridiculous to see that “the Colleges established prior to notification of new Regulations in the official gazette” have been discriminately exempted from providing space requirement inrespect of land (prov. 4) , Minimum constructed area (prov. 5), the teaching hospital (prov. 7.4), Infrastructure of college (prov. 8) whereas no restriction is seen made in the enhancement of admission capacity (prov. 6) from the previous 50 to 60. It is to be conjectured how the 20% increase in the admission capacity is going to be accommodated conveniently? If such exemptions are liberally issued how can the existing sub-standard institutions be improved or standardised ? Such saving provisions have never been seen in any of the previous regulations.
The prime necessity behind every attempt in this regard should be to produce competent Homoeopaths to develop the system through research and studies to meet the newer and newer challenges in the health arena. These aspects have not been considered while preparing the new Regulations.
Prof. (Dr.) Ravi M. Nair
Former Advisor (Homoeopathy), Dept. of AYUSH, M/o. H&FW, Govt. of India
Phone : 09446344344, 0471-2344344, E-mail : firstname.lastname@example.org
Please post your valuable comments ad creative suggestions here.