A leading professional organization for psychiatrists is confronting significant internal dissent over its decision to establish a new international examination center in Qatar. The move, intended to broaden global access to its qualifications, has been met with a formal protest from over 150 of its members based at prominent UK hospitals and universities.
The controversy stems from a partnership with Qatar’s state-run Hamad Medical Corporation to host clinical membership exams in Doha. While the initiative aims to facilitate certification for medical professionals from the Middle East and surrounding regions, critics argue it aligns the institution with a nation whose laws and societal practices conflict fundamentally with the college’s stated ethics.
In a letter to the organization’s leadership, signatories outlined deep concerns. They pointed to Qatar’s legal framework, which criminalizes same-sex relationships and lacks robust protections for women against domestic abuse. The letter further cited the documented treatment of migrant workers, who constitute the vast majority of the country’s labor force, referencing allegations of exploitation and demands for compensation linked to projects for the 2022 FIFA World Cup.
Proponents within the college frame the expansion as a necessary step to reduce inequity and improve mental healthcare in underserved regions, arguing against what they describe as a “colonial mindset” in selectively choosing partner nations. They emphasize that exam content and standards, including competencies related to caring for LGBTQ+ patients, will remain identical to those administered in other international locations like Singapore.
However, dissenting members remain unconvinced. Several senior psychiatrists have publicly labeled the partnership a mistake and “completely morally unacceptable,” expressing dismay that their professional body would choose to operate in a country they describe as “constitutionally homophobic.” Specific worries were raised about how exam scenarios involving patients with gender dysphoria, HIV status, or experiences of homophobia could be appropriately and safely conducted in the local context.
The dispute highlights the challenging balance between promoting global professional access and maintaining consistent ethical standards, setting the stage for continued debate within the medical community.