NMC yet to release disability SOP

The demand has come as the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) declared the result of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for Postgraduate (NEET-PG) 2025 on August 19.
The letter also said that the NMC should release the training schedule for all 16 medical boards, which will be conducted by doctors with disabilities before NEET PG counselling, as per SC directions.
The letter also said that the NMC should release the training schedule for all 16 medical boards, which will be conducted by doctors with disabilities before NEET PG counselling, as per SC directions.Photo | File Image
Updated on
4 min read

NEW DELHI: The NEET-PG counselling is slated to begin in September, but the National Medical Commission (NMC) is yet to release the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for postgraduate admission guidelines for doctors with disabilities.

Taking up their cause, the largest organisation of health professionals with disabilities in India has written to NMC to immediately announce the revised admission guidelines, failing which would mean incurring contempt of the Supreme Court directions.

Apart from the guidelines, Doctors with Disabilities: Agents of Change, a biggest pan-India group of health professionals with disabilities in India striving for social justice, have also demanded to expand the number of NMC-designated assessment centres; training schedule of all 16 medical boards and to publish the names of doctors with disabilities who will be appointed to these medical boards.

The demand has come as the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) declared the result of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for Postgraduate (NEET-PG) 2025 on August 19. But revised admission guidelines for NEET-PG students with disability were not announced.

This despite the fact that the NMC expert committee, which was attended by Dr. Vijay Oza, President, Postgraduate Medical Education Board (PGMEB) of NMC, took up the matter on February 24 on coming up with inclusive guidelines for PG and super speciality courses for students with disabilities.

Speaking with the TNIE, Dr Satendra Singh, the founder of the group, said, “We are witnessing the continued medicalisation and harassment of candidates with disabilities in the ongoing NEET-UG counselling.”

“The same is bound to repeat in NEET-PG counselling, as the revised guidelines are still not out, leaving in place the discredited practice of numerical percentages of disability-something the Supreme Court has already struck down,” said Dr Singh, who had also taken up the issue of NEET-UG students with disability when the NMC failed to issue revised disability guidelines in time. This paper was first to flag this issue on July 18.

NMC, a statutory body in India that regulates medical education, medical professionals, institutes, and research, finally announced the revised guidelines two days before the counselling was to begin on July 21, but did not announce SOP for PG admission.

They also did not announce a separate direction to include doctors with disabilities in the assessment board or increase the number of centres to all states as mandated in the Supreme Court directions.

Dr Singh, who has written to the NMC, said the Commission should release inclusive guidelines/SOP for postgraduate training of doctors with disabilities, in full compliance with Supreme Court orders, before the commencement of NEET-PG counselling.

“In the absence of these SOPs, doctors with dyslexia will be forced to undergo learning disability tests designed for children, as was applied by the medical board last year. Moreover, the assessment must shift from the numerical percentage-based criteria to a functional competency test as directed by the Supreme Court,” he said in his letter, which was also marked to the Dr Oza, and Director General of Health Services (DGHS) under the Union Health Ministry.

The letter also said that the Commission should expand the number of NMC-designated assessment centres for doctors with disabilities before NEET PG counselling, ensuring at least one board in each State and Union Territory.

It also pointed out the inadequate number of centres across India. There are only 16 centres across 11 states.

The letter pointed out that during the ongoing MBBS-UG counselling, candidates with disabilities witnessed harassment, such as those from Odisha, being forced to travel all the way to New Delhi for assessment.

“We have also received representations from a pregnant doctor with a disability in Hyderabad, where neither Telangana nor Andhra Pradesh has a designated centre,” it said.

The letter also said that the NMC should release the training schedule for all 16 medical boards, which will be conducted by doctors with disabilities before NEET PG counselling, as per SC directions.

“To enable members of the Disability Assessment Boards (DABs) to apply the functional competency test effectively, they must be adequately trained by professionals and persons with disabilities or those who have worked on disability justice,” the letter said.

Also, the letter said that NMC should publish the names of doctors with disabilities appointed to the medical boards at all 16 designated centres, as mandated by the Supreme Court, before NEET PG counselling

“Constituting and notifying the Appellate Medical Body under the aegis of the DGHS in accordance with judicial directions before NEET PG counselling. PGMEB, NMC, must issue binding directions to all medical colleges to operationalise and publicly disclose details of Enabling Units, accessible infrastructure, reasonable accommodations, and the Equal Opportunity Policy on their official websites,” the letter added.

It added that NMC should issue comprehensive guidelines on clinical accommodations in full compliance with Supreme Court orders so that medical institutions are aware of the scope and legal enforceability of such accommodations.

The disability champion also said that the non-compliance with binding directions issued by the apex court is not only legally untenable but also constitutes a violation of the constitutional rights of persons with disabilities.

“Should these issues remain unaddressed within a reasonable timeframe, it shall remain open to any aggrieved person or body to initiate appropriate contempt proceedings before the Supreme Court,” he added.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com