Changes to the University of Sydney medical curriculum

To the Editor: The recent article on the review of the University of Sydney Medical Program (USydMP)1 by Goulston and Oates included a lengthy list of “changes made or planned in accordance with key recommendations”.2 Regrettably, and to the despair of many, the most needed change will not take place.

It is reported in the review that the average age of future USydMP graduates will be 29–30 years, as it has been for the past decade.1 From 2008, those who aspire to be surgeons will competitively enter the new Surgical Education and Training (SET) program of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS) after completing “at least their second postgraduate year”.3 The SET program is for 5–6 years, depending on the specialty. Most trainees subsequently take a subspecialty fellowship for 1–2 years, either in Australia or overseas, by which time our hapless graduates will be 40 years old. A woman may have to have leave of absence for a pregnancy. A postgraduate degree is now a prerequisite for an academic career and this involves an additional 2–3 years of full-time research. Finally, it takes in the order of 5 years to establish a referral specialist practice in most branches of medicine.

In the review document, Goulston and Oates nihilistically state “There is no opportunity for streaming within the USydMP”.1 There is no mention of undergraduate education in Australia, let alone the streaming of such education, in the article from the RACS outlining the SET program.4 However, strangely enough, it is noted therein: “North American students must make their long-term career choice in the final year of their medical school and are streamed accordingly”. One wonders if there is any purposeful communication between the RACS and our universities. There certainly should be.

It is imperative in this day and age that undergraduate and postgraduate medical education be considered as a continuum so that we can begin to rid ourselves of the absurdly long and manifestly inefficient process outlined above. The historian and journalist Paul Johnson put his astute finger on the problem in writing a column about universities generally: “. . . a visitor from another planet, unfamiliar with the history of the institution, would think it odd that our ablest boys and girls, at a time when their mental and physical powers are at their highest, are withdrawn from the service of society and kept in comparative idleness . . .”5

One can but conclude that, at least for future surgeons, the wrong people are at the helm at the RACS and at the University of Sydney’s Faculty of Medicine.