According to the updated directives of the National Medical Commission (NMC), the percentage of disability is not the sole criterion for determining a candidate's eligibility to study in postgraduate medical education programs. The new assessment system emphasizes functional competence, requirements specific to each specialty, as well as reasonable accommodation and patient safety when evaluating candidates with established types of disabilities for MD, MS, and DNB courses.
Candidates applying under the category of individuals with established types of disabilities must have at least 40% established disability and a valid Unique Disability ID Card (UDID). Nevertheless, the percentage of disability indicated on this card cannot unilaterally determine the right to participate in the competition. The Medical Assessment Committee will conduct an independent verification of the candidate's ability to demonstrate the necessary competencies for the specific postgraduate course.
The directives establish functional requirements that vary by specialty, particularly for fields related to surgery and other practical procedures. These requirements include fine motor skills, bilateral dexterity, mobility, depth perception, and hand-eye coordination. However, some of these requirements have been criticized by disability rights advocates.
Dr. Satendra Singh from Doctors with Disabilities: Agents of Change noted that requirements such as 'optimal use of both upper limbs' and the non-recognition of sign language are prime examples of discriminatory criteria in the guidelines. He argues that they treat physical characteristics as substitutes for professional qualification, rather than assessing the candidate's ability to safely perform core functions of the specialization while considering reasonable accommodations. In his view, such blanket requirements could exclude qualified doctors from medical education, and the choice of specialization should be based on an individual, scientifically grounded functional assessment that accounts for assistive technologies and clinical settings.
For several other clinical specialties, the assessment will include skills such as history taking, examination, basic procedures, and documentation. Candidates may utilize assistive devices or receive reasonable accommodation, including modified tools, accessible workspaces, and flexible schedules where appropriate.
The directives clearly state that no candidate should be deemed suitable or unsuitable solely based on their disability category or percentage. The evaluation must be objective, individualized, and based on functional capabilities, and before declaring a candidate unsuitable, reasonable accommodation and assistive technologies must be considered.
For candidates with conditions such as Autism Spectrum Disorder, Specific Learning Disabilities, and Intellectual Disability, the assessment will consider communication skills, comprehension, ability to follow and give instructions, structured learning, adaptive and independent functioning, with support if necessary.
The Medical Assessment Committee may decide on the candidate's suitability, suitability with reasonable accommodation, or unsuitability after analyzing demonstrated functional competence, the feasibility of reasonable accommodation and assistive technologies, and the ability to complete the course and ensure patient safety. Assessment processes must be fair, transparent, and free from physical, environmental, communicative, or biased barriers.
For specialties requiring fine motor skills, stamina, depth perception, or rapid decision-making, the directives indicate that the disability percentage is insufficient and a functional assessment is required. The goal of this system is to promote equality and reasonable accommodation while maintaining academic standards and patient safety. This framework replaces previous guidelines from the NMC and the Medical Council of India to the extent that they conflict with the new system.