When doctors strike, patients pay the price

Sri Lanka’s free healthcare system has long been one of the country’s greatest strengths. For generations, families from every social background have depended on public hospitals for everything from childbirth to emergency surgery. In times of crisis, whether during natural disasters or disease outbreaks, the commitment of medical professionals has often been praised as heroic.

But today, many ordinary citizens are asking a difficult question. What happens when the very system people rely on suddenly becomes unavailable because doctors go on strike?

The repeated trade union action led by the Government Medical Officers’ Association (GMOA) is increasingly causing frustration and anxiety among patients. Each time doctors withdraw services to press their demands, it is not policymakers or administrators who feel the immediate impact. It is the patient who has travelled hours to reach a clinic, the elderly person waiting for medication, or parents carrying sick children from one hospital to another in search of help.

Doctors, like any other professionals, have the right to raise concerns about working conditions, policy decisions or salaries. No one disputes that healthcare workers face immense pressure, long working hours and difficult environments. Many serve tirelessly despite limited resources, and their concerns deserve attention.

Yet medicine is unlike most other professions. Doctors take an oath to place patient welfare above all else. Society places enormous trust in them, often at moments of fear and vulnerability. When strikes shut down outpatient departments or delay medical services, that trust begins to weaken.

Anyone who has spent time in a government hospital knows the hardship patients already endure. Clinics are overcrowded, waiting times are long, and many patients arrive before dawn to secure a place in the queue. For daily wage earners, a hospital visit means losing a day’s income. The consequences go beyond inconvenience. Patients managing chronic illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes or kidney problems depend on regular consultations. Emergency services technically continue during strikes, but hospitals inevitably struggle. Staff shortages lead to overcrowded wards and longer waiting times. Frontline workers bear additional pressure while patients remain anxious about whether they will receive timely care.

What makes the situation more troubling is that many disputes arise over administrative or policy disagreements rather than immediate threats to patient safety. Public sympathy toward doctors remains strong, but repeated disruptions are slowly eroding that goodwill. Patients rarely understand the technical reasons behind disputes; they only experience fear when medical help becomes uncertain. For families already struggling with rising living costs, turning to private hospitals during strikes is often impossible. Private healthcare remains too expensive for many middle and lower-income households.

This leaves ordinary people trapped between professional disputes and their own urgent medical needs. At the same time, responsibility does not lie solely with medical unions. Successive governments have also failed to create effective systems for resolving disputes before they escalate. Poor communication, delays in decision-making and lack of structured dialogue often push both sides into confrontation, with citizens paying the price.

There are examples from other countries where medical professionals protest without shutting down essential services. Structured negotiations, arbitration mechanisms and alternative forms of protest allow doctors to voice concerns without disrupting patient care. Sri Lanka too must explore such options.

Leadership within professional bodies also carries responsibility. Decisions that affect millions must be carefully weighed. Industrial action may bring attention to grievances, but repeated shutdowns risk damaging public trust in the healthcare system itself.

Sri Lanka’s healthcare sector is already under strain due to economic challenges and the migration of medical professionals overseas. Patient numbers continue to grow while resources remain stretched. Service disruptions only add to these pressures.

Doctors remain among the most respected members of society, and that respect is well deserved. But respect also carries responsibility. People do not see doctors merely as employees of the state; they see them as caregivers entrusted with human life.

Industrial action that repeatedly leaves patients without care risks undermining that bond. Protest culture within the medical profession must evolve in a way that protects both professional rights and patient dignity. Healthcare ultimately exists for the people. Any dispute, no matter how serious, must be resolved with one guiding principle in mind that patients should never be made to suffer.