Why such anger over boundaries?
I am puzzled as to why the argument over practice boundaries is generating such anger among GP colleagues.
I agree that having far-flung patients would lead to increases in workload, and may interfere with standards of care, but why do colleagues think that they would be compelled to take on, or keep, patients who live further away than they feel appropriate?
Our practice is on the edge of an urban area, and we have plenty of patients living outside our area but closer to our practice than some in the green-belt part of our practice area.
We have a flexible approach with respect to our patient registration.
We neither always insist that patients leave our list when they move away, nor do we limit new registrations to residents of our practice area.
It seems that practice areas' sole function is to enable a PCT to remove patients easily from a practice's list, should it be expedient for any reason. We may not miss this function if they are abolished.
From Dr Jeremy Platt