Interns Clash With Professors Over Medical Education Issues
Controversy has erupted in South Korea’s medical community as Park Dan, the head of the Emergency Countermeasures Committee of the Korean Intern Association, fiercely criticized four professors from Seoul National University for their disparaging remarks about medical students and interns. On March 17, 2025, Park remarked, “They are people who do not even have the qualifications to be called professors,” directly addressing the professors’ critique of interns as they return to their training.
The conflict began when professors Ha Eun-jin, Oh Joo-hwan, Han Se-won, and Kang Hee-kyung issued a statement expressing disappointment and concern over the actions and attitudes of returning interns. They insisted there seemed to be no responsibility for patients or respect for colleagues among the medical community. According to them, the atmosphere within the comments directed at medical personnel exhibited arrogance and birthed fear about the quality of treatment received from these professionals. “I feel fear as to whether the students and junior colleagues I once knew are still the same,” they claimed.
Responding to these statements, Park highlighted the serious oversight alleged against the professors: “I studied alone. I learned by asking my fellow interns,” he pointed out through social media. Park stressed the dire need for professors to fulfill their teaching responsibilities and emphasized the lack of guidance received during his training. “The individuals who should be teaching are you,” he admonished, questioning whether the professors acknowledged their roles and responsibilities.
Park criticized the professors for claiming superiority due to their own strenuous internship experiences, which they argued shaped the current medical standards. He countered their narrative with poignant rhetoric: “Is it something we should say is an unavoidable sacrifice even if people die from overwork?” His point aimed to challenge the rationale behind expecting interns to work excessive hours without concern for their welfare.
Hospital environments are currently rife with tension, as Park argued, stating, “The biggest problem is the hierarchical transfer of duty and responsibility,” where hospital directors delegate work to professors, leading to interns bearing the brunt of labor demands. Meanwhile, the professors’ statements revealed increased pressure on returning interns, adding, “What has returned to the interns is only ridicule.” This environment has resulted in calls from various groups within medicine to address systemic flaws.
The Medical Forum for Future corroborated Park’s sentiments, issuing their own statement demanding apologies from the four professors. They declared, “It seems the increase of 2,000 medical school students is not the solution,” highlighting the lack of viable alternatives for improving the current situation. They urged professors to engage more thoughtfully with their students rather than merely criticizing them.
Adding to the complexity of this discussion is the recent announcement by the Ministry of Education. They have indicated plans to reverse enrollment quotas to pre-determined numbers, contingent upon the adherence of medical students to certain conditions for returning to training. Authorities indicated, “If students return within March 2025, we will revert the medical school enrollment quota for next year back to 3,058- the number before any increases.” This has sparked outrage and discontent among many students who feel their needs are being overlooked.
Addressing the comments from the professors about their past working conditions, Park highlighted, “The reality is, even if people die of overwork, it is still perceived as acceptable for national health. Would you say this is something we should accept?” His remarks aim to paint the current pressures faced by medical interns as intolerable and demand reform.
His remarks and critiques have underscored the stark divide between the current generation of medical professionals and the earlier cohort represented by the professors. The professors, fearful of their students’ efficacy and intentions, have called for medical interns to clarify their commitment. Meanwhile, Park Dan has proposed introducing performance evaluation systems for professors to assess their educational contributions, challenging them to take direct responsibility for the quality of training provided to interns.
Seoul National University’s professors countered, urging students to choose between siding with the faculty or engaging with what they termed ‘misguided tactics.’ Eager to highlight the need for reform, Park concluded his interactions with the professors by insisting, “I hope they do not justify exploiting patients.” These tensions are not just academic; they reveal larger systemic issues within Korea’s healthcare education, impacting future generations of medical professionals.
All parties involved aim for progress, yet the path forward is fraught with accusations and demands for accountability. The future of medical education and intern rights may hinge on how effectively these conflicting voices can find common ground and reconcile their differences. Without change, the status quo may lead to more significant unrest within the healthcare system, affecting not only medical intern relationships but also patient care standards moving forward.
link
