Wednesday, April 3, 2024

MOH, MOHE inadvertently admitted PP a scam and illegal

Push come to shove, the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (RCSEd) could not keep their silence and let the locals do their bidding. FMT here reported RCSEd President Rowan W Parks writing to the Minister of Health.  

RCSEd had to express their dismay to cover-up before their "Medical Scam" is blown wide open. Despite intense efforts by the colluding "Medical Scam syndicate" the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC) was not falling to the snake oil charm of RCSEd to deceptively peddle their "illegal" FRCS International diploma.

The syndicate includes MATVCS, Malaysian College of Surgeons, Academy of Medicine of Malaysia, Deans of Medical Faculties of several colluding Universities, IJN, former DG of MOH, current Deputy DG of MOH (who signed a gazettement which is an old trick and mistake), private practitioners, DAP politicians, and most recently Malaysia Medical Association.

Sadly, both the Minister of Health and Minister of Higher Education responded to the letter to oblige by stooping and kow-towing to RCSEd to announce swift amendment to the Medical Act as solution for the Parallel Pathway to get registrated as specialist. 

Inadvertently, the Ministers confirmed that PP was a scam and illegal from the onset. It needed an amendment to the law for a resolution to the impasse. MMC was never a stumbling block or Little Napolean. It was the law. 

The law exist to be enforced. Instead of doing so, it is to be amended to enable the offenders to get around the law. This is tantamount to being lenient to law breakers. 

It does not offer a strong justification to amend a law and is indeed a sham. 

And, yet the senator from Penang could have the cheek to demand absolute transparency and reform of MMC in the manner of a political organisation and public administration!  

PP will be more costly than local University own program. At a time government need to austerity drive and retain money from leaking abroad, this is going counter to national.economic policy and selifish intention not towards  nation building. 

There are still the time honoured process and operational issues before the Specialists could be produced. Will it serve towarda solving the shortage of specialist at government hospitals?  

The reply to the extensive campaign by the scam syndicate, which also include use of lies, deception and underhanded administrative actions, was completely blocked off by mainstream media. However, the Ministers intention for Parallel Pathway program was given coverage by all the media.  

Again and again from centuries ago, the supposedly educated and smart Malaysian doctors are still psychologically stuck with inferiority complex to the Europeans. 

And, they remain gullible to the charm and trickery of their former Colonial Masters.  

The Concerned Citizen and CTS Surgeon responded: 

Statement 11: “Much ado about nothing?”                    

This drama that we are having currently is akin to a comedy play written by William Shakespeare. 

The play revolves around themes of love, deception, misunderstandings, and wit. It is filled with instances where characters are misled or deceived by false information, leading to misunderstandings, confusion, and comedic situations.

This article is written as a rebuttal to a recent write by Code Blue on April Fool's Day entitled: Open Letter To Malaysia’s Health Minister On Cardiothoracic Surgery Parallel Pathway Training — Royal College Of Surgeons Of Edinburgh

The problem, however is serious and non comedic, and the title should more aptly be: “Much ado about one thing ... LEGALITY OF THE CTS PARALLEL PATHWAY PROGRAM!!!”!!!

The RCSEd President Rowan W Parks recently commented: “The Malaysian Medical Council’s non-recognition of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh’s (RCSEd) cardiothoracic surgery parallel pathway programme goes against the principle of partnership and work undertaken at the request of the country’s health ministry.

My many questions to you Sir are: 

A. Can you explain about the non recognition for our graduate for employment and ineligibility to apply for CESR and subsequently getting the CCT? 
Another statement from the RCSEd President on the trainees 'who have been trained and assessed robustly’.                                                                       

B. Trained by whom? Locals or UK trainers?                                                 

C. Are there documented evidence of such assessments? For your information, in Malaysia, we need documentation for MQA to do these assessments.                                      

D. If it is considered as a local program since all the training and exams are done here in Malaysia, did the Parallel Pathway Program get the permission to start in Malaysia through MQA?

E. If it considered as an International program why can’t it get the full recognition in the UK?                  

 F. Is it an equal partnership? What is the definition of a partnership?                        

Partnership refers to a cooperative relationship between two or more parties who agree to work together towards shared goals or mutual benefits. Overall, partnership is characterized by cooperation, trust, and shared decision-making, with the ultimate aim of achieving common objectives or advancing shared interests. 

It often requires effective communication, mutual respect, and a willingness to compromise in order to maintain a healthy and productive relationship. 

G. Is there mutual respect and willingness to compromise here?

Further statement by the RCSEd President, “RCSEd has a long relationship with Malaysia, having been involved in training the country’s cardiothoracic surgeons since 2000 when one of its top surgeons Pala Rajesh was invited by the National Heart Institute (IJN) to initiate and develop the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery programme”.                                           

I beg to differ. That has nothing to do with a formal training program. Many occasions, our local surgeons invite international subject matter experts to come and show us how to do certain new procedures and other forms of teachings.                     

I believe that a business opportunity was seen by Dr. Pala Rajesh who was a senior representative of RCSEd at that time. He saw a possibility for RCSEd coming into Malaysia in a bigger way, knowing well that the offer to be made will benefit UK more than it would Malaysia. With this venture, he can get political mileage for higher positions in RCSEd. Which he did achieve later, being elected into the office of the Vice President of RCSEd. 

I clearly remembered asking him in defence of our trainees, why wouldn’t they be allowed to use the qualification for employment and training in the UK? His answer was that RCSEd is happy to accept, but the issue is with GMC UK. So he made it clear, that it was the precondition. 

We didn’t think much about it at that time, until we learned that such a decision by GMC UK would be translated as non recognition of the FRCS International version, thus would lead to non recognition by our MMC. 

Yet another statement by the RSCSEd President.

 “The RCSEd was also invited by the health ministry, Academy of Medicine of Malaysia (AMM), and the Malaysian Association for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (MATCVS) to help develop a national training programme in cardiothoracic surgery for the country”.                  

We agreed then, and only realised later that we were short changed. 

This time, the diploma that was given to us was the International version which as mentioned above, has its inherent problem for us. The older diploma for surgery in general, which can be taken outside UK was recognised in the UK. The new international diploma is different. It is now specifically for cardiothoracic surgery and is not recognised. 

You cannot compare apples to oranges or in our case…durians. 

The FRCSEd (Cth) examination was NEVER conducted outside of the UK before, until the Tripartite arrangement with Hong Kong and Singapore and later became the Quadrapartite exams. Please take note that it is only an exam and training is done by locals. 

Both these countries have their own qualifications and training system by local surgeons. Let us be clear that the FRCSEd on its own, is not directly recognised by both countries. To use this qualification for employment in both countries, you will have to apply using documents as non recognised qualifications. 

For the sake of argument, even if it is recognised in both countries, Malaysia has its own Law that doesn’t recognise a qualification which is not recognised in its own country. 

One need to work in the UK with a training number in a position as Senior Registrar before one can be eligible to sit for the Intercollegiate exams. It is recognised in the UK and Malaysia till today. 

Is this a partnership based on the definition given above? 

Please send to MMC in black and white that the international diploma version is recognised in the UK. I’m sure he will be able to do so because it cannot be directly recognised like the Intercollegiate version in the UK.

“Candidates who pass are awarded a Fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh in Cardiothoracic Surgery, a qualification which enables them to apply for specialist registration as cardiothoracic surgeons in the UK.” 

A lot of English word play is used by the RCSEd President which appears to deceive us into believing so, but truth is that there is no direct recognition as compared to the Intercollegiate FRCS - thus, ineligibility to apply for CESR and subsequently not getting the CCT in the UK.          

Sure you can apply for registration, but you will not be able to apply through the same process as FRCS Intercollegiate. The application has to be done through a process for non-recognised diploma. Don’t be deceived by these word play by our English friends. It is a good thing that our command of English is sufficient to detect the subtle differences in the meaning of the words and sentences use. 

The RCSEd President went on to say…. "that the examination is of the same standard as the UK Intercollegiate Specialty Board examination in cardiothoracic surgery and the only exam used in Singapore and Hong Kong”.               

If this is so, please recognise the diploma as the Intercollegiate version, and allow our candidates to go to the UK for employment and training just as for those who obtain the Intercollegiate diploma. And we will be delighted to back off and not argue about the situation with the international diploma. 

Please put it in black and white. But the bottom line is that it is not, and never will be recognised by the GMC UK. 

We didn’t know better then, when we invited RCSEd to come and help us in the training of our doctors, not realising that they have put a caveat unlike the previous FRCSEd diploma before 2010.
The Brits with their colonial past history were known for their wits and deception. Let’s not fall for that again. Before we know we will be dependent on them yet again. 

Why didn’t MATCVS seek advise from  MMC? Is it because its Chairman was the same person who was also the DG of Health? So you think that he will be able to bulldoze the programme through?

The RCSEd President continued to say, "Examiners are provided by RCSEd from the UK while senior surgeons from the region are also trained and appointed. Expertise with regards to standard setting, quality assurance, psychometrics and question bank are provided by RCSEd according to standards required by the GMC”. 

So why won’t the GMC UK recognise it? That would have solved all our problems.  

When I was in the MBCTS, which was the Board for the Parallel Pathway, I specifically remembered we were told that we had to make our own exam questions as their exam questions are copyrighted and we are not allowed to use them. 

Is this again an indication that we are not the same and evidently different? Food for thought….

These are mere words from the RCSEd President. The UK doctors were not involved in the later exams They were there initially to conduct only the VIVA exams but not anymore. They left it to us to decide on the standards and based on trust, they endorsed the program. 

In fact, we told them that we will remove the topic of oesophageal diseases from our syllabus, because in Malaysia, this is the jurisdiction of the Upper GI surgeons. In that way, this makes our syllabus different from theirs. If we demand that our FRCSEd International qualification be recognised in the UK, they will turn around and say that our syllabus are different. They will just wash their hands off. 

Words are cheap. Thus, there is always a need to have an independent quality assurance body like the MQA, to ensure this through proper evidence.

In Malaysia, the education and training system in Malaysia requires thorough MQA assessment. The FRCS International aka Parallel Pathway doesn’t have this type of assessment. 

You want us to respect the rights of GMC UK and your Law but you openly criticise our Law and SOP.  Mr. President, you should respect and not interfere with the Law of another country by making these comments and questioning about the rules and regulations pertaining to the MMC which is the equivalent to your own GMC. 

Contrary to popular belief, I would like to remind the supporters of the Parallel Pathway, that we are not your enemy. We are actually fighting for the Parallel Pathway to be recognised as equals to the FRCS(Cth) Intercollegiate qualification instead of the non-recognised International version. 

If you can do this Sir, we will be happy to stop questioning the legality of this Parallel Pathway Program and MMC will have no reason to reject the application for NSR certification because the qualification is finally recognised in its home country. 

I wish to reiterate that MQA involvement will only be needed when the Parallel Pathway is considered a local program, and if it is considered as international, then MMC will not reject NSR certification when the qualification is recognised in their home country. 


No comments: