UNITED STATES
Health policy experts have gone on the offensive over continuing uncertainties regarding the fate of the United States Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, saying the situation was unfair to many young medical professionals.
Pointing out that medical school debts average $US200,000 ($A278,000) staffers at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and three other medical institutions have put their case in the Annals of Internal Medicine publication.
Senior author, David A. Asch said that while there were justifiable reasons to support the program and also justifiable reasons to change it “there are no justifiable reasons to keep recent graduates in suspense”.
The program, which began in 2007, forgives remaining Federal debt for borrowers who have made 120 payments or 10 years’ worth of loan repayments while employed in low-paying Public Service or non-profit jobs.
Those conditions are particularly favourable for physicians, as most begin their careers in residency programs, which counts towards years of repayment, at non-profit medical centres or hospitals, and often continue in that setting afterwards.
According to the authors, a third of 2017 graduates who borrowed money for medical school report planning to use the program.
Recently, the program has been threatened with elimination by Congress and the Administration of President Donald Trump, with little guidance about the fate of current borrowers.
A House of Representatives proposal makes borrowers after 1 July, 2019 ineligible for the program and leaves unclear whether borrowers pursuing Federal loans prior to that time will be grandfathered in.
Further muddying the waters, the Department of Education retroactively reversed certifications for some lawyers working in non-profit institutions, and indicated that certifications were now temporary and subject to final approval by the Department.
Professor Asch said while physicians were trained to handle uncertainty “that does not excuse leaving new physicians facing uncertainties that can be easily resolved”.
“Even as we consider new approaches toward financing training for public service, we should insist on clarity for those who have already pursued it,” Professor Asch said.
Washington, 31 August, 2018
