The new regulation on supplementary work of doctors introduces stricter criteria for issuing permits to work in the private sector alongside the public one. The key criterion is the length of the waiting list in the primary institution, where permits will not be issued if the waiting time exceeds 30 days. Additionally, doctors with managerial roles or academic titles may receive negative points. The regulation requires annual renewal of permits and stricter supervision of doctors’ work. The goal is to increase transparency and control over the quality of work in public healthcare, reduce waiting lists, and regulate supplementary work. While some experts welcome the regulation as a step towards better control, others believe the existing system already has sufficient mechanisms and that the new regulation will not significantly impact the reduction of waiting lists.
Political Perspectives:
Left: The left-leaning perspective emphasizes the importance of transparency, regulation, and public healthcare quality. It supports the new regulation as a necessary step to reduce waiting times and prevent exploitation of public resources by doctors working in private sectors. It highlights the need for stricter controls to ensure equitable access to healthcare services.
Center: The centrist view acknowledges the benefits of the new regulation in improving oversight and reducing waiting lists but also points out potential challenges in implementation. It stresses the importance of balancing doctors’ rights to supplementary work with the need to maintain quality and availability in public healthcare. The centrist narrative is pragmatic, focusing on the regulation’s practical impact.
Right: The right-leaning perspective is more critical of the new regulation, viewing it as potentially bureaucratic and restrictive. It emphasizes doctors’ professional freedom and the existing mechanisms for control, arguing that the regulation may not effectively reduce waiting lists. The right narrative often stresses the importance of private sector involvement and warns against overregulation that could stifle medical professionals.
