New professionalism only after PNM goes

THE EDITOR: Dr Margaret Nakhid-Chatoor in an article published in all three daily newspapers expressed disappointment at declining standards of professionalism within our national community.

She lamented, among other things, the fact that senior public officials continue to be exposed as dishonest; that they whimsically disregard their contractual obligations and are not prepared to accept responsibility for their actions.

She then proceeded to outline the qualities that are usually associated with professionals and professionalism. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines professionalism as “the conduct, aims, or qualities that characterise or mark a profession or a professional person.”

Sociologists have long grappled with trying to come to terms with an understanding of a conceptual definition of a profession. Their approach has been largely taxonomic – an “attribute approach” – that attempts to describe a set of unique characteristics of those people whose occupations we regard as professions.

Professional activity is conceptualised as primarily intellectual – ie, a learned occupation – that is inherently practical, and could be taught, and to which there is a strong altruistic component.

Professions are thought of as possessing attributes such as having an overarching systematic theory, authority, community sanction, ethical codes and a culture. Such attributes are not unique to the professions. They exist among tradespeople but arguably to a lesser or varying degree.

Attributes ascribed to members of a profession are not automatically acquired by simply having a profession, or being a member of a professional fraternity.

Sociologists have begun to understand that the idea of what constitutes a profession is inextricably linked to the kind of society in which that occupation exists – to its political and economic environment, the prevailing social structure as well as its cultural norms.

In the West, occupations thought of as professions have been characterised by their relative autonomy, a tradition of collegiality, and their consensus on ethical codes. Professional bodies enjoy significant autonomy and a measure of self-regulation supported in law that allows them to set and maintain high ethical standards that are difficult for politicians to manipulate.

The strength of professional standards within any given profession grows in direct proportion to its political autonomy and a willingness to act in the public’s best interest. Political intrusion, or worse yet political control, is anathema to true professionalism.

Nakhid-Chatoor needs to understand the historical role the PNM has played in the erosion of established professions in this country. The PNM’s historical interaction with professional bodies has been geared toward gaining greater control over them. Political intrusion has compromised professionalism.

The PNM has been instrumental in emasculating and eroding our professions. It has sacrificed professionalism for political expediency and political control.

As a medical professional, I can point to the PNM’s amendment to the Medical Act in 2003 when it created a parallel board to grant licences to foreign doctors; amendments in 2007 aimed at greater control of its council. It has done the same with the Dental and the Pharmacy Board Acts.

New professionalism can only begin to emerge in this country a generation or two after we have properly banished the PNM and its backward attitude.

STEVE SMITH via e-mail