Response

I would like to thank Dr Haque for his reply to the moonlighting debate. Most of the arguments he raises in favour of moonlighting cannot be underestimated, but they all have a central theme: improving one’s income. It is shocking to me, and I imagine to those who taught in the program he trained in, that he feels he gained the majority of his technical expertise while moonlighting. Is this a reflection of moonlighting’s advantages or the shortcomings of his training program? Although I sympathize with Dr Haque’s need to “improve [his] personal and professional life,” my job as an “educator” is to ensure the proper training of residents. Unfortunately Dr Haque does not elaborate on the true educational value of his moonlighting shifts. Was he supervised? Was he taught? Did someone review his errors? Was there quality assurance?

At the end of the day, Dr Haque could have waited 1 year and, rather than moonlighting, spent the extra time studying, playing with his children, and truly enjoying his life before starting his real job. After all, I am sure that in his current role as a clinical lecturer his income has increased fivefold, but so have his responsibilities.

• Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada