Lets think about what the interview process is trying to achieve.
People are trying to assess whether someone would be up to the job in practice.
I don't think we're wondering about whether they can hack the academic nature of the course these sort of A level results demonstrate that.
There are however other questions about whether someone would be psycologically able to cope with the job. Would you crack up the first time someone you've been treting dies for example.
Seems to me that an interview is likely to be a poor way to determine that - likely to be somewhat arbitary.
Perhaps a psycological evaluation would be a better way.
Incidently I don't buy sqad's assertion about civil liberties ant tying people to contracts. My Company and many others offer training that requires those who leave the company to repay if they depart within a certain timeframe.
I don't see a lot of lawyers protesting it.
I don't however know what the loss rate of UK trained doctors out of the NHS is whether or not it is a significant problem or whether sqads simple assertion that there's not enough bandwidth is true.
There is some research here
http://www.bma.org.uk...y/nhsissuesfaqs.jsp#2
That seems a bit old but suggests that 15 percent of doctors left the NHS after 2 years although over half of those were dissatisfied with medicine as a career
That would tend to suggest (if it's still acurate) that there isn't such a problem with "hightailing"
Perhaps we need more teaching hospitals