El requisito obligatorio del servicio social en salud del Perú: discriminatorio e inconstitucional
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Issue Date
2014-12-02
Metadata
Show full item recordOther Titles
Mandatory requirement of social health service in Peru: Discriminatory and unconstitutionalCitation
Mayta-Tristán P; Poterico JA, Galán-Rodas E, Raa-Ortiz D. El requisito obligatorio del servicio social en salud del Perú: discriminatorio e inconstitucional. Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica. 2014;31(4):781-7.Publisher
Instituto Nacional de Salud (INS)Additional Links
http://www.rpmesp.ins.gob.pe/portalweb/Articulo.htm?Id=4991Abstract
El servicio rural y urbano marginal en salud (SERUMS) es una actividad que realizan solo los profesionales de la salud al Estado peruano, ya que constituye un requisito obligatorio para optar por la segunda especialidad o para trabajar en un centro de salud público, y obtener becas del gobierno para futura capacitación. Los escasos cambios legales en el reglamento de este programa social y el enfoque de “servicio” restringido a los profesionales de salud conllevan a que esta política sea discriminatoria e inconstitucional por atentar contra el derecho a la educación y al trabajo. No hay evidencia científica que sustente la utilidad y efectividad de este programa, tanto en la calidad de servicio y mejora de indicadores sanitarios, como en la adecuada distribución y retención de profesionales de salud. Sugerimos abolir el requisito de obligatoriedad y replantear una estrategia política que ayude a atraer y retener a los profesionales de la salud en zonas vulnerables del Perú.The rural and urban-edge health service (SERUMS) is an activity that only health professionals perform for the Peruvian government, as it is a mandatory requirement to qualify for a second specialty or to work in public hospitals and public health care facilities, and obtain government scholarships for future training. The few legal changes in the rules of this social program and the focus of “service” restricted to health professionals lead to a perception of this policy as discriminatory and unconstitutional because it violates the right to education and work. There is no scientific evidence that supports the usefulness and effectiveness of this program in terms of quality of service and health indicator improvement, as well as in adequate distribution and retention of health professionals. We suggest to abolish the compulsory requirement and to reformulate a political strategy to help attract and retain health professionals in vulnerable areas of Peru.
Type
info:eu-repo/semantics/articleRights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLanguage
spaDescription
percy.mayta@upc.edu.peCollections
The following license files are associated with this item:
- Creative Commons


