Opinions are divided as to whether or not workers, such as doctors and engineers, are obliged to work in the country where they got their education. While I understand that workers have an ethical duty to make up for their education, I contend that the workers are free to work in whatever country they prefer.
On the one hand, it is reasonable to believe that professionals have a moral obligation to pay back to the country that provided them with education. The rationale behind this is that, when a person receives public education, he or she enters an implicit contract, which implies that the worker will work for the country in the future. The government fulfils its part of the contract, and therefore the worker should do so as well.
The aforementioned argument notwithstanding, I believe that precluding experts from working abroad is largely a negative practice. The primary drawback of this approach is that it hinders workers’ professional growth. The vast majority of developing countries cannot provide genuinely gifted specialists with the necessary facilities to conduct advanced research. Consequently, many of them choose to pursue careers in more developed nations, where they can fully realize their potential. This is manifested in the growing number of Ivy League applicants who have already obtained their degrees in the developing countries where they were born. Preventing such mobility would not only affect individual talent development but also reduce the number of scientific breakthroughs done globally.
To conclude, although it might be morally sensible to work for the country that provides one’s education, I strongly believe that such a policy is detrimental to developing societies.