I've already commented (but lost in your web!). BUT I'd remind you all that BMA was in league with political parties, didn't represent doctors (yes, it was lied to and confused by hot-air 'carrots' of GP responsibility). Doctors reps must take some blame for the disaster of the current NHS, and its supporters in Westminster, the media and the greedy biguns in USA. It's time to fight for our NHS! Decent. Democratic. Skilled. Cheapish. Effective.
THANK YOU Dr Moncrieff. It's worth remembering that our skin also reacts to drugs-. We swallow them as easily as alcohol (another poison!). I suspect dosages (set by pill makers) are generally too high, that doctors know little about resultant rashes, and that patients are unaware they are swallowing excessive poisons
There's another aspect, as important as 'fixing' non-attendence: Surely absence is a reflection of the misfit between school,and child - We must examine changing school (tweeking it!) as well as altering pupils' attitudes. Probably the problem stems from far too few adults in school (both teachers and helpers). Whether the nation wants to examine and then change schools is a moot point - but neccessary!
SO MUCH DISINFORMATION!
Clare Gerada says: "We . . need to start protecting what we value most!"
The "moral panic" (of the NHS/parliament?) arises because of the secretive way the new Bill was drafted, altered and voted in - GPs must deal with the resulting guilt and guile in protecting what they value. They and their patients suffer grievously. HOW we do things infects the results, as Nelson Mandela said. But everyone must understand, this is an issue common to us all - GP's, administrators, funders, MPs, patients, nurses - everyone! That we voted the 'enemy' in is a terrible betrayal of a healthy UK and of our legal system.
OK, doctors are over-busy but the BMA poster is saying clearly, "don't contact us. Stay away". This is NOT well put , and has the wrong emphasis: either doctors care or they do not. The poster seems to suggest that "go away" is a valid carer's attitude. What a disaster (also because it's becoming true!). Doctors should be saying "let's work together - here's how: . . ." The 'partnership' is essential, surely?
Courts carry out review after study reveals GP evidence was factor in only 2.9% of disability benefits appeals
It certainly looks like a political agenda- where doctors are being punished with work and patients' disdain (both with political origins) further decreasing doctors' standing and their authority in the eyes of the nation.
It's part of the Coalition's and Oposition's policy to trash the NHS for the benefit of private businesses: increase the chaos, reduce the funding and get media busy screaming about shabby health standards. All doctors, concerned about patients should ask, "How are our reps responding?"
I agree it seems unneccessary to snoop on medical records but, in the context of our emails etc. being spied upon, (over which few have protested) it seems exaggerated to protest about medical records.
We must change the rules of govenment using another party NOT one of the big three, one which supports privacy and prohibits snooping - now a common disaster!
"The answer" must be: spend money on what is wanted.
Cutting services inevitably means reduced services (and breakdowns- you call "burn-outs").
The BMA needs a more prominent view on present politics of a faked austerity coupled to increased expectation. The present situation slipped in behind our backs needs challenging and change.
Doctors and patients, wake up!
It seems unwise to share patients' records. Maybe ONLY the current year should be available (the rest staying secure). The medical profession needs to realise that this is another slice-up of GPs , the confidence of their patients is at risk. The authority of doctors is being challenged. More damage from the new NHS legislation!
Report and comments are sane and thoughtful. It is not in sync with the dishonesty of government nor with the fictional 'need' to cut costs.
You are right to say added facilities involve greater costs. Staff have been refused 1% income increase; there's no hope of a reasonable solution. It's a game of 'blame GPs' which no one wins!
There's no detail as to why Dodds was passed-up. Why?
His "private enterprise" background doesn't bode well: Monitor is a key authority within NHS, its head must be sympathetic to NHS values and respectful of its history to avoid a hiccup. Not that Westminster seems interested in such matters.