MMI practice set: health policy and society

Checked 19 October 2026 against the sources listed at the end.

We wrote every scenario here ourselves. None is a real station, none is remembered from an actual interview, and every university has its own criteria, so use them to practise thinking, not to predict an interview. The approach under each one is one strong way to organise your thinking, not the answer. Practise out loud, in your own words, and time yourself. Station formats are described by Adelaide University↗ (external link), UWA↗ (external link) and the University of Auckland↗ (external link), and UQ publishes a pre-interview briefing pack↗ (external link). For the standards doctors are held to, see the code of conduct that the Medical Board of Australia publishes, Good medical practice↗ (external link).

Scenario 1: The clinic that closes

Prompt

A rural town's only weekend clinic may close because of cost. You are asked to advise a local council.

What it probes: Balancing cost, access and evidence.

One strong approach

1. Ask who uses the clinic and what happens if it closes.
2. List options: reduced hours, telehealth, shared staffing.
3. Weigh costs against health outcomes and fairness.
4. Recommend steps and say what you would monitor.

Points worth reaching

• Name the people affected.
• Offer options, not just a verdict.
• Admit uncertainty.

Common traps

• Treating money as the only factor.
• Ignoring those with the fewest alternatives.

One way an answer might sound (for Scenario 1, "The clinic that closes"; yours should be in your own words)

"First I'd want to know who uses the clinic and what they'd do without it. If it's the only weekend option, the people who lose most are probably those with no car or little flexibility. Then I'd set out options for the council: shorter hours rather than closure, a phone or video service for minor issues, or sharing staff with a nearby town. I'd compare cost with what we might lose, such as more emergency visits, and I'd say what I'm unsure of. My recommendation would be to keep a reduced service while we collect numbers for six months and ask residents what matters most, then decide."

This is a worded example of one strong approach, not the answer. Notice the order: acknowledge, ask or look for facts, weigh the people involved, choose an action, and say what you would do next.

Scenario 2: Screening everyone

Prompt

A new screening test catches a disease early but also produces many false alarms. A health service asks whether to offer it to all adults.

What it probes: Benefits, harms and communication.

One strong approach

1. Ask about the benefit and the burden of false alarms.
2. Consider cost and capacity for follow-up.
3. Consider how results would be explained.
4. Suggest a trial or targeted start.

Points worth reaching

• Early detection is not automatically good.
• Think about anxiety and follow-up.
• Evidence should guide the decision.

Common traps

• Assuming more testing is always better.
• Ignoring those who may be harmed.

Scenario 3: Vaccines at the school gate

Prompt

A school wants to hold a vaccination day, but some parents have concerns and others work and cannot attend.

What it probes: Respect, access and communication.

One strong approach

1. Listen to concerns and share clear information.
2. Offer several times and ways to take part.
3. Respect consent requirements.
4. Avoid pressure or judgement.

Points worth reaching

• Trust is built by listening.
• Access matters.
• Respect does not mean agreeing.

Common traps

• Dismissing concerns.
• Making it hard for working parents.

Scenario 4: The long waiting list

Prompt

A hospital has a long waiting list for non-urgent surgery. A board member suggests allowing paid priority for those who can afford it.

What it probes: Fairness and system effects.

One strong approach

1. Clarify the aim and the people affected.
2. Weigh fairness against any benefit to the whole system.
3. Consider alternatives such as extra sessions or clearer triage.
4. Recommend with reasons.

Points worth reaching

• Name the strongest argument on each side.
• Focus on need.
• Think about unintended effects.

Common traps

• Giving a one-line answer.
• Ignoring those who cannot pay.

Scenario 5: Language and information

Prompt

A health service finds that many local families do not use its services because information is available only in English.

What it probes: Equity and practical solutions.

One strong approach

1. Ask the community what would help.
2. Consider interpreters, translated materials and community leaders.
3. Check how you would know it works.
4. Include cost and sustainability.

Points worth reaching

• Involve the community.
• Practical steps matter.
• Measure outcomes.

Common traps

• Deciding for a community without asking.
• Assuming translation alone is enough.

Scenario 6: Sugar on the label

Prompt

A government is considering a tax on sugary drinks to reduce obesity. Shops and some consumers object.

What it probes: Evidence, freedom and fairness.

One strong approach

1. Define the problem and the aim.
2. Consider evidence, costs to low-income households and alternatives.
3. Weigh personal choice against public benefit.
4. Suggest how to monitor.

Points worth reaching

• Show you can hold two ideas at once.
• Think about who bears the cost.
• Be clear on your reasoning.

Common traps

• Moralising.
• Ignoring those who would be affected.

Want more? Our free sample shows how XScrubs practice works, and pricing lists what is included.

Not affiliated with, or endorsed by, the UCAT ANZ Consortium. Not affiliated with any university either. Always check the university's own page first.