The Korea Medical Association Engaging in Collective Action with the People's Lives as Hostage at Every Critical Moment Against COVID-19

[경향신문]

- Choi Dae-jip, president of the Korea Medical Association / Yonhap News

The Korea Medical Association announced that it would not cooperate with the COVID-19 vaccination if the National Assembly passed an amendment of the Medical Service Act. At a critical moment when the wave of COVID-19 can resurge, the collective action by doctors has emerged as a variable in the nation’s fight against the virus. The last decision has drawn criticism for the reason why the Medical Association is opposing the amendment is vague, since the amendment will allow the government to cancel the license of doctors who commit serious felonies. And the doctors are again holding the people hostage amid the first ever COVID-19 pandemic in an effort to protect their collective interests.

The parliamentary Health and Welfare Committee passed an amendment of the Medical Service Act, allowing the state to cancel the license of doctors who are sentenced to imprisonment regardless of the crime. Afterwards, on February 20, the Korea Medical Association released a statement announcing that it would engage in collective action if lawmakers passed the amendment. The Association said, “We will engage in a full-scale protest, such as a nationwide doctors’ strike,” and suggested the possibility of a boycott of the COVID-19 inoculation, scheduled to begin on February 26.

If the doctors do engage in collective action as warned by the Association, it can interfere with the government’s plan to begin inoculation at the end of February and establish herd immunity by November. Kim Woo-joo, a professor of infectious diseases at the Korea University Guro Hospital said, “It is important to start vaccination on the right foot, but if a large number of private medical staff involved in the inoculation do not cooperate, it will have a serious adverse effect.”

This isn’t the first time that the Korea Medical Association tried to secure its interests on condition of cooperating with the COVID-19 vaccination. On February 17, the Association opposed the amendment of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, which changed the term, “generic alternative,” to “generic equivalent (same active ingredient),” and complained that the government was “throwing cold water on the morale of the doctors, determined to devote themselves to the people’s health by actively participating in the government’s vaccination project.” Yet at the same time, they said, “If the government is trying to call the doctors, already tired and exhausted, out onto the street once again, then we doctors will not hesitate.”

During the second wave of COVID-19 last August, the Medical Association also engaged in a number of strikes opposing the government’s attempt to increase the number of students admitted to medical school and to establish a public medical school. The conflict between the medical circle and the state peaked when medical school students refused to take the medical licensing examination and the state responded by refusing to accept additional applications for the exam. The situation was resolved when the government later gave the students another opportunity to take the examination. This time, doctors pulled out the collective action card again ahead of COVID-19 vaccination. This is why people are criticizing the Medical Association for trying to secure its interests using their influence, which grew every time the nation faced a critical moment in its response to COVID-19, as leverage.

It is uncertain as to whether the doctors will actually engage in collective action. First, it is not clear as to why they oppose the latest amendment, which seeks to withdraw the license of doctors who commit a serious felony. Given the characteristics of medical services, which deals with the lives of the patients, society requests a high level of occupational ethics and morality from doctors. But according to amendments since 2000, doctors have only had their license suspended, without it being canceled even if they commit sexual crimes. Lawmakers heeded the concern that the amendment could encourage doctors to avoid medical activities with the possibility of accidents, such as high-risk surgeries, and included a clause stating that the license would not be withdrawn when doctors are sentenced to imprisonment for work-related involuntary manslaughter in the amendment.

The Association will also have trouble obtaining public approval by using inoculation as leverage to secure its interests, when vaccination is to begin amid a resurge of COVID-19 cases. Woo Suk-kyun, co-head of the Association of Physicians for Humanism said, “Doctors stirred major social controversy by collectively refusing to see patients during the second wave of COVID-19 last year. I am skeptical as to how the people will accept these doctors set to engage in a strike holding vaccination hostage.” Jeong Hyeong-jun, head of policy at the Korean Federation of Medical Activist Groups for Health Rights said, “The government must not send out a signal that all arguments by doctors with vested interests will be accepted.”

The government and the ruling party fiercely criticized the behavior of the Korea Medical Association. In a meeting with the Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasure Headquarters this day, Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun said, “If they engage in illegal collective action, the government will respond sternly.” Lee Nak-yeon, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea wrote on his social media account the previous night, “Some people are maliciously encouraging concerns about the vaccine, but the people are wise.” He indirectly criticized the Medical Association asking, “What interests are those ‘some’ seeking by taking advantage of the anxiety and distrust of the people?” Lawmaker Woo Won-shik also said, “It is nothing other than the worst collective selfishness, leading efforts to secure one’s own interests by holding the people’s life as hostage.”