Des Gorman: Auckland University Emeritus Professor of Medicine on the research into Otago University's affirmative action programme

A programme aimed at getting more under-served groups into medical school is being scrutinised.  

New research in today's New Zealand Medical Journal has found Otago University's affirmative action initiatives haven't increased the number of students from poorer backgrounds. 

Māori now make up 20% of enrolments, reaching parity with European and Asian enrolments for the first time. 

But Auckland University Emeritus Professor of Medicine Des Gorman told Mike Hosking the programme wasn't designed to just lift Māori enrolment. 

He says when it was brought in 50 years ago, it was aimed at improving Māori health outcomes and access. 

LISTEN ABOVE 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
We got a medical insight. Three decades worth of a
Tigo University med school enrollment DART has been analyzed put
into a new report. The schemes aimed at boosting underrepresented communities,
they've had some impact. So in other words, to put
it really simply, what happens is you've got to get
a certain score to get into med school. If you're
MARI or various other backgrounds, you can get a lower score.
Students with wealthy backgrounds continue to fill the cohorts. Governments

(00:21):
reviewing the Schemes Act, of course, causes all discriminatory The
Auckland University Medical Emeritors Professor DEAs Gorman is well us
is very good morning to you.

Speaker 2 (00:29):
Good mining Mike.

Speaker 1 (00:30):
Do you reckon it's worked in any way, shape or
form that we're all happy with or not?

Speaker 2 (00:35):
Well, it certainly worked in terms of increasing a number
of MARI doctors we have, but that's not the problem
that was designed to fix. Might The problem with designed
to fix was to improve access from my way to
healthcare and to improve their health outcomes. And it was
introduced more than fifty years ago. I went first to

(00:55):
score fifty three years ago. It was in place then
I didn't know that then. But the problem is designed
to fix us, not to have more brown places in
the medical queue. But it was actually to improve access
from our healthcare and improve our health outcomes, which it
is not. That's never been measured.

Speaker 1 (01:14):
So the idea is, and this is the part I've
never understood. The idea is that if you have when
you turn up to the doctor and you're Maori and
the doctors Mari, somehow things change or things are different.
Is that true?

Speaker 2 (01:26):
I don't think it is. I think we've had an
obligation on us as medical schools to prepare people who
are culturally confident from the get go, and that's never changed.
The idea. Also think that I said, if you're Maray
and more likely to go and work in a area
with an large number of Mari patients that is currently
under service, and in fact you take a kid a

(01:48):
rural town in terms of medical school in Auckland, I'd
suggest that that rural sounds the last nas you want
to go back to you.

Speaker 1 (01:54):
Well, that's true, and we know that from these statistics
stu't we And it's also expanded, so it's Mari indigenous specific,
it's rural is refugee at students from lower socioeconomic households.
The lower socioeconomic thing hasn't moved the needle at all.
Are any of these things a problem and do they
need fixing or as long as we have enough people
becoming doctors, we've solved our problem.

Speaker 2 (02:17):
Well. Look, I think NEWSLD is like the idea of
a meritocracy, like and we like the idea that the
best students gives to the medical school, and so a
process which distorts it in meritocracy will always have trouble with.
And I can tell you now that some of the
thirdest days of my time is it in medical school
was talking to families who were so distressed that there's

(02:38):
someone order didn't get into medicine. Because they did, they
were into a prefect group. Yeah. So I think we've
going to be very careful before we start fiddling with meritocracies,
and particularly if we start introducing social engineering without appropriate research. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (02:54):
I tend to agree. What about the difference, and this
is outside, but the difference between Auckland and I target,
for example, is based on numbers. If you've got good numbers,
you get in in Auckland. It's it's got more to
do with the person they interview you, do you have
a view on that or not?

Speaker 2 (03:07):
Oh, look, I don't think the interview contributes much to
the overall waiting. And if you look at the list
that would accept at Auckland, whether without the interview, it's
pretty much.

Speaker 1 (03:17):
The same time.

Speaker 2 (03:18):
Yeah, the lists be obviously you've got a bunch of
overachieving kids fill ducts and so on, or competing for
a limited number of ices. Mean you're telling it some
of those places are no longer available to them, so
will generate an ang still, of course it will. Then
how do you justify it? You're justify it on the
base of that you're improving overall community well being, But

(03:38):
if you haven't met it the how can you claim it?

Speaker 1 (03:40):
It's interesting? Good on you might you go well appreciate it?
Pretty much? Is Gorman Auckland University, Medical Emeritus Professor.

Speaker 2 (03:46):
For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news talks.

Speaker 1 (03:49):
It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.