We are a divided profession, we are divided by what unites us.... the ever growing massive workload and a desire to do our best. When you are working so hard it is difficult to see how hard others are working but all to easy to blame.
"‘They are not the things you can measure through numerics, but it gives you a general impression of the culture of that practice and how caring and compassionate those staff are, and I think it is important that we include that in our inspection regime."
You wish to include things that cannot be measured in your inspection regime......
This from the CQC which is still deciding what it's standards are and a Chief inspector of GP's who's remit is still to be decided.
Luckily the GMC never bows to political pressure. I do hope Dan is keeping up his CPD and clinical work to levels required for revalidation. Of course he won't allow this to take up any of the time he should be spending as a health minister. Anyone else think Daniel Leonard James Poulter may have a conflict of interests if he feels he can......
Provide a good standard of practice and care.
Keep your professional knowledge and skills up to date.
............whilst employed as a health minister?
Too little, too late? Stable doors and frisky horses, done deal, this ship has sailed, no refunds. It has gone too far to have tea parties in our surgeries. The BMA has to tell the public the NHS is being privatized out to the lowest bidder by the Government; that the Government wants lowest cost and doesn't care about the service. Only by making the government have to call Drs liars will the popular press listen.
Anonymous comment 06 June 2013 0:18 and repeated 9:05. If you are a doctor your comments show significant divergence from duties of a doctor namely:
• Be honest and open and act with integrity.
• Never discriminate unfairly against patients or colleagues.
You clearly state your intention to discriminate on the basis of gender. Perhaps you could offer justification for this discrimination or even reflect upon if your seemingly overt discrimination contributed to your colleagues decision to leave your practice.
If you are not a doctor but still an employer then your comments show a decision to discriminate against people based on gender.
Clearly as you choose to avoid identifying yourself you have doubts about the acceptability of your statement.
Jeremy Hunt got very cozy with the papers before he was promoted to his current position. Cozy enough that many wondered how he kept his job at all. Is it any surprise that he uses his friends in the papers and other outlets to bash GPs? There is no shortage of evidence of pressure on primary care but there is no appetite from the media to highlight this. Hunt has the media to repeat what he wants them to with so called journalists never challenging his words.
And how does a persons choice to have children and bring them up and continue to work in a high pressured professional capacity manage to be turned into negative? The headline should remove the word female, as this adds no justification to these ignorant comments, and the MP should consider how this sits with equality rights.
He said: ‘It may hit prescribing budgets, although I honestly think that most people will hear this message and just go and buy their own NRT methods and not go and get prescriptions all the time. I don’t think it will be a major burden on GPs’ time or budgets.
Professor Aveyard...... is this evidence or opinion? If you are introducing new NICE guidance I want the former and not the latter please.
For a young doctor............... I would say anaesthetics is the way forwards, I will never stop wondering why I changed.
Perhaps if more Drs leaders had the balls that Prof Gerada has, then the Government's harmful attacks on the NHS and the profession could have been less damaging. Though I do not agree with everything Prof Gerada says I do agree with a lot and I respect her stance in representing me. I do not relish the return to Government lap dogs when she steps down in November.
Most of our patients have the health check and ignore the advice. My entirely none scientific opinion is that it is a lot of extra appointments, tests and time for the patient to decline intervention to modify risk.
He may live in a lovely house in the country...... but is he a GP? Demand increases, government makes delivering on this harder and harder and have shifted blame firmly to GP land. Deliver more for less...... for less pay and more work..... oh and take the blame. It is a utopian future, unfortunately for it's utopian for the politicians.
@anonymous my comment relates to an historic exam result of a former president which was questioned by Dr Coales. If you wish to make a comment about the CSA please feel free to do so, but please do not decide to accuse me of commenting on the CSA and IMGs when I have done no such thing.
Perhaps Dr Coales would feel happier if we were all sure Dr Baker had passed the MRCGP examination, or is it just the President we have to question that for?
Perhaps Dr Baker would be best advised to represent the members of the college and not herself. If she can demonstrate that the membership does not want the government challenged she is right to say this. I do not believe that the college members want another government yes (wo)man so soon after Prof Field. I think this is exactly the wrong time for any representative body not to be challenging the huge harm this government is doing. If Dr Baker wants to represent my college she had best find out what the membership want.
Anonymous 2:40 PM could you perhaps outline how I am expected to make a check that someone is entitled to treatment when they present with an acute problem. Could you define the universal form of identification carried by everyone which allows me to identify those who make a contribution and are entitled. Or perhaps you could tell me which groups of patients I should target my questioning towards. I would suggest that this not something I am trained to do. I am not trained in immigration law or assessment, I am trained as a doctor. And let's not forget that the government and their agencies do not know how many people are here illegally anyway.
Don't you have to have an e-portfolio to be able to register for certification. At around £590 for this ( without membership) this would cut your discrepancy to around £235 after you include exam "savings". Tax can knock a chunk off that so over 3 years probably not that bad. Additionally I think you can gain on tax for the saving in exam fees but not for actual exam fees so that is another small chunk. So when you think carefully not that much difference.
Toothless and ineffective are two of the more polite words I have to describe my feelings of "our" negotiators. They seem to be messengers rather than negotiators. They should hold the government to account and make them have to contradict our stance, they seem to have no idea of what politics entails and as this is all politics this seems a major failing.
I always though they looked at any prescriptions you wrote in the CSA anyway. They certainly told us they were assessed in 2010 when I did it.
I guess only you can know if you feel it is worth it. I similarly initially found the RCGP learning environment unhelpful when I was a trainee but I am now pretty certain had I utilised it more as a trainee it would have benefited me considerably. The InnovAiT journal is considerably more useful than the BJGP. I think it really depends how much you value being a member of the college, but if you have paid so far get as much out of it as you can.