Aren't we already in that position?
I think capping training is a bad idea - by limiting specialty posts you increase their value - like a "precious metal".
Also, does GP really want to be awash people who 'failed to get in' to the other specialties? Capping places will lead to GP being the 'poor man's' choice.
There's no point in forcing unwilling people into general practice - it will kill any sense of pride the specialty has if it becomes a 'dumping ground' for "failed specialists" - clearly it is already regarded by some in this way - only today a medical school peer (still a trainee) has sounded off about her surprise to see a GP actually "bothering to examine a child's ear!" - although of course they 'weren't holding the otoscope correctly....'
How does the profession proceed when even should-know-better colleagues have contempt for it?
I'm glad you agree Una! I'm sure many others also would. You will get my vote when the time comes!
Not sat CSA but I am intrigued as to why they don't use some "live" patients with actual signs? MRCP paces expects doctors to pick up on signs and formulate management plan, and not to miss potential acute issues - murmur for example, signs of ALD, perhaps evidence of fibrosis? I realise these aren't every day in GP but surely as GPs if we can spot these and refer appropriately from our findings we enhance our satisfaction, our credibility as a profession an our patient care? As such I cannot uderstand why some patients with 'signs' don't form part of CSA? (apologies if they do any I'm being ignorant!) surely it's more useful for us to be able to not miss this stuff than a hospital doc where the patient is in a relatively safe and supported environment. Adapting the best bits of PACES for CSA would be in everyone's interests, please RCGP take note