IT IS now more than two weeks since president of the Barbados Association of Medical Practitioners (BAMP), Dr Carlos Chase, made his controversial statement that Cuba-trained doctors working here country were “not up scratch” in relation to professional requirements.
Since then, there have been widespread criticisms of Chase’s allegations originally circulated in an email to BAMP members. His criticisms included lack of basic medical knowledge and of experience in examining patients.
Strong objections have been expressed by various governments of the Caribbean Community whose nationals have been trained in Cuba and with which there are various health cooperation agreements.
Most important, from the Barbadian perspective, firm solidarity has been unequivocally expressed by Minister of Health Donville Inniss for both the doctors trained in Cuba as well as the cooperation this nation receives from Cuba in the health sector
Latest report on this sensitive issue, as reported in our yesterday’s edition, quoted the secretary of the Cuban Scholarship Committee of Barbados, Margaret Haywood, as saying that this country was losing Cuba-trained Barbadian doctors to Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago because they were not being accepted locally.
There are questions of relevance that Chase needs to address, in fairness to himself, BAMP, the Ministry of Health and, of course, the affected Barbadian doctors.
The most of important would be whether he, or BAMP, had ever made known in writing the concerns expressed about “lack of basic medical knowledge” among the Cuba-trained doctors? If not, and in view of the public comment of surprise by the minister, is the BAMP president now prepared to at least signal a willingness to review the text of his email message?
There is also a related question resulting from recent comments on the subject by Professor E. R. “Mickey” Walrond, speaking as chairman of the Barbados Medical Accreditation Council (BMAC).
Since BAMP is not a body to be referenced for approval of a foreign-trained Barbadian to practice locally, did Chase or any of his colleagues considered it relevant to make known the association’s sweeping allegations to the BMAC? If not, why not?
Walrond’s observation on the role of the Caribbean Association of Medical Councils (CAMC) in the consideration of qualifications and ability to practice is also quite useful for more than BAMP.
