Published 16 July 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a830
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a830

News

Student rejected by Imperial because of conviction is granted interview at Manchester

¹ BMJ

A student whose offer of a place to study medicine at Imperial College London was withdrawn after the college learned of his criminal conviction has been offered an interview at Manchester University after he appealed against Manchester’s previous decision to reject him.

Majid Ahmed has been trying to secure a place to study medicine for almost two years, since he first applied to four university medical schools in September 2006, but he believes that his attempts have been hampered by his conviction for burglary.

He was rejected by Imperial College last summer when the college discovered his conviction; and a second attempt to get into medical school this year, by reapplying to three schools, and adding a fourth to the list, has so far failed. His interview at Manchester will take place some time in the next two weeks.

Mr Ahmed was 16 when he pleaded guilty to "burglary of a dwelling" in December 2005, having been found trespassing in a deserted house with two older friends, aged 21 and 23. He was ordered to carry out eight hours of community service, which he did cleaning benches and making bird boxes.

In an interview with the BMJ Mr Ahmed explained some of the circumstances behind his misconduct. His parents had separated and he had recently moved schools—from one where he was considered exceptionally clever to one where he had no special status and no friends. He started spending more time in older company, in particular with the two youths with whom he was later to be arrested.

At sixth form he decided he wanted to be a doctor and so undertook a great deal of work experience and charity work. In September 2006, aged 17, he applied to medical schools at Cambridge, Imperial, Leeds, and Manchester. He did not declare his conviction on the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) application form, in the belief that it was "spent" and as such did not need to be declared.

But when he was called for interview at Leeds and Imperial he decided to inform them of the conviction. He was then rejected by Leeds, on the grounds that he had failed to declare his conviction previously, but not by Imperial.

After the interview at Imperial he was offered entry on achieving two As and one B in the A level examinations. He accepted it as his first choice. But when he declared his conviction in the criminal disclosure form that Imperial sends to all prospective undergraduates he was called for a "fitness to practise interview."

A few weeks later, in July 2007, Imperial rejected him. In August 2007 he received his A level results—four As—but he still did not have a place at a medical school.

He reapplied to Cambridge, Manchester, and Leeds in September 2007 as well as Sheffield for the first time. Rejections from Manchester, Leeds, and Sheffield followed, but Cambridge invited him to a round of interviews, which were also unsuccessful. Desperately wanting an insight into the nature of these decisions, Mr Ahmed made requests under the Freedom of Information Act to get hold of his records. He learnt that Cambridge had decided that he was fit to practise, despite his criminal record, but had rejected him on academic grounds.

Mr Ahmed has appealed to Manchester, having been rejected without interview twice. On Friday the board of directors of the university agreed that this was unfair, so he now has an interview in two weeks’ time. If he is successful he will have to undergo another fitness to practise interview.

There seems to be little precedent for how Mr Ahmed’s case should be handled. Although the General Medical Council does not deal directly with medical students, it says that a doctor with a criminal record can practise and that criminal convictions or cautions must be considered individually.

A statement from Imperial College said: "Medical practitioners hold a position of responsibility within society and must often deal with vulnerable people and sensitive situations. The public must have confidence in the integrity and probity of its doctors.

"As a condition of acceptance to its medical degree courses, and in common with all UK medical schools, all applicants are required to have completed an enhanced criminal record disclosure by the given deadline. This is required before the course begins because students come into clinical contact with patients and vulnerable people from the very beginning.

"The process for selection of candidates for medicine is run separately from the process which considers CRB [Criminal Records Bureau] disclosures, in order that selection panels are not prejudiced by information or deliberations around the latter.

"Applicants are required to declare all convictions, whether spent or unspent. If an applicant has a criminal record then, depending upon the nature of the crime, they may be required to attend an additional interview."

Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a830

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Student with spent conviction gains place at medical school

Jessie Colquhoun
BMJ 2008 337: a1261. [Extract] [Full Text]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Widening access to Medicine

Naeem Ahmed
bmj.com, 22 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Criminality

Martin D Ferry
bmj.com, 24 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Diversity

Victoria E A Tempest
bmj.com, 25 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Response

Rehannah Hassan
bmj.com, 27 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Are Doctors Really A Cut Above All The Rest?

Xavier K Mmono
bmj.com, 31 Jul 2008 [Full text]

Re: Imperial Affair.....

Gamal Ahmed
bmj.com, 31 Jul 2008 [Full text]