This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

Gold, incentives and meh

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.


Our new medical school offers hope for both present and future GPs


TheRoadWarrior @4.11pm. Are we talking about the young GPs who have passed MRCGP where clinical examination with pathology present is not scrutinised? The same ones who have also not been examined on basic science (apart from during their own undergraduate teaching and finals), who may flounder when asked about the pathophysiology of an ailment by a first/second year medical student, the knowledge of which allows a return to first principles, and an understanding of which is essential for when they are thrown into service provision in secondary care with their colleagues who have been to a more typical medical school? How do you envision the curriculum to be in the first and second year of undergraduate teaching in this institution, and what exactly will be the GPs role here as quite clearly teaching basic science (the usual components of 1st and 2nd MB/BM) will not be their forte? What do these young GPs really have to offer beyond their teaching qualifications on paper- earned at the expense of frontline experience, which ultimately is what they are preparing the students for? The corollary ie stuffy old GPs, would be even more poorly suited to teaching in such an institution but surely an able teacher should have a decent bedrock of experience to draw upon, which can underpin the nuances of the craft? I think the system of teaching medicine at the undergraduate level needs to change across the board but I am less than convinced that the current proposal as outlined above is the answer. The process of training GPs in particular, with the death-knell of the general physician and no looming prospect of the return of this essential role, needs to be much more robust because a great amount of pathology is not picked up upon in primary care in a timely fashion because the GPs lack the ability to think on their feet by returning to first principles based on pathology and physiology, integrating the full spectrum of anomalies evident and then detecting the clinical signs. The scheme above will foster division, and given enough time will denigrate general practise further, and the first inkling of this will turn out to be a nominal difference in the name of the degree awarded which may not be apparent initially but will come to pass. If I were a surgeon I would be non-plussed if a graduate from an institution which focussed on general practise, or psychiatry, were to be awarded the same BS/ChB degree when the focus of their studies gave much less import to this. Forgiveable? Perhaps not, but understandable.

Posted date

27 Sep 2018

Posted time