IFMSA responds

Editor - I was pleased that the studentBMJ devoted an editorial to the International Federation of Medical Student Associations (IFMSA) in its last issue ¹. I was active in the federation for several years, and I really appreciated Chohan’s critical perspective. Largely, I agree, but two points were incorrect.

Chohan concludes that the federation is an organisation run from the top down; this is not entirely true. In the IFMSA, the people at the roots are the ones who make things happen. This is the important point, and it is reflected in the autonomy of the member organisations: they choose their activities and how to organise them. The executive board manages the international network and the communication channels between members, but the responsibility ends there.

At the end of his editorial, Chohan concludes that politics and bureaucracy kill good projects. There is indeed some bureaucracy and politics in the federation, but we always try to prevent this getting in the way of our activities. We continuously try to find ways to make organising activities easier. Besides, there are more damaging factors then bureaucracy and politics that could slow down or “kill” projects.

Over the years we have created several training programmes and support mechanisms for projects, with the aim of preventing them from failing due to a lack of funding, experience, or recruitment. Only through these activities can the IFMSA achieve its objectives.

At first glance, the IFMSA might seem like just another paper tiger, with a lot of regulations and bylaws. But below the surface, thousands of activities are created, managed, and executed at local level—for and by medical students—at medical schools all over the world. The best way to experience this is by joining the IFMSA. Then you might see for yourself that the federation is able to convert talking and politics into action. We do have the power to change so much all over the world.

1. Chohan N.- Global arguments:breaking the borders for medicine. studentBMJ 2002;10:133-4. (May.)