Re: “My personal observation and concerns on the implementation of Act 857”

Read Comments Comments (3)

• an old doctor 7 years ago

  I couldn't finish reading your article because it was too long and lack empathy. What I sense is that those who trained long ago as technicians with some lower qualification and have practise for ages and are probably over 60 ...
  read full comment

  I couldn't finish reading your article because it was too long and lack empathy. What I sense is that those who trained long ago as technicians with some lower qualification and have practise for ages and are probably over 60 years are being asked to upgrade their qualification before. That is like a law begin applied retrospect fully. That is illegal. Exceptions are always made. When you are 60 they will be a new law saying if you don't have a PhD you can't practice so close your private without exception and you will shout unfairness. In the 60s and early70s most lab trading ended a technician level. There were only few Diplomas. You are fortunate that now the minimumm training is higher. You are wicked to insist your seniors should go back to school to upgrade their degree before practicing. There is always provision to limit them to some tests but not to ban.

  reply
• Nimo 7 years ago

  It is like making a law now for doctors that if you are not a specialist you can't practice. Few people specialised before. If there is a new arrangement now that remakes sure everybody specialices you don't ban all non speci ...
  read full comment

  It is like making a law now for doctors that if you are not a specialist you can't practice. Few people specialised before. If there is a new arrangement now that remakes sure everybody specialices you don't ban all non specialists or ask everybody to go and specialize even at 60. Your rather helpwithout some rules that you can no longer for a certain operation unless you are signed off by a zspecialist to certify that you can do it

  reply
• Dennis Adu-Gyasi 7 years ago

  Please, the law was applied just as you described. By a ministerial fiat, everyone found in the law was considered and registered to continue practice. No one has been thrown away. What the article I rejoined seek to say that ...
  read full comment

  Please, the law was applied just as you described. By a ministerial fiat, everyone found in the law was considered and registered to continue practice. No one has been thrown away. What the article I rejoined seek to say that, even with the law, progressively, everyone should be continue to be registered. I wonder why the law would have been necessary?

  reply