Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    GPs urged to commit to seven-day service or lose funding

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38620935

    The government really doesn't have a clue. How do they expect this to happen? Spreading the same work force over a greater time, with the move to increase doctors marginally that won't take affect for another 5/6 years, this really isn't the solution. Thoughts?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Wrong solution to the wrong problem. At least half yhr problem in the NHS is not a lack of time or resources, but people wasting the time and resources. The better solution is to encourage people to use their common sense and for almost certainly minor thongs self medicate and only go to the GP when it doesn't get better rather than going straight away, similar with A&E. A small, nominal fee for the GP (we're talking a few quid at most here)reduces time and resource wasting on the demand side, and provides extra funds to be wasted by the NHS itself.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Genius from the government, so where are all these GP's coming from?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Wrong solution to the wrong problem. At least half yhr problem in the NHS is not a lack of time or resources, but people wasting the time and resources. The better solution is to encourage people to use their common sense and for almost certainly minor thongs self medicate and only go to the GP when it doesn't get better rather than going straight away, similar with A&E. A small, nominal fee for the GP (we're talking a few quid at most here)reduces time and resource wasting on the demand side, and provides extra funds to be wasted by the NHS itself.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    While i agree that that is a good idea (timewasters do need to be got rid of) there will be people on low incomes etc who genuinely cant afford it, however nominal the fee may be. Something does need to be done about time wasters though.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    GPs are already overstretched as it is. This is a threat from the Tories because they don't want to solve the real problem, which is a funding issue. Fewer and fewer medical students want to become GPs. This seven day ultimatum only makes the recruitment and retention situation worse for GPs.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by habeas.corpus)
    GPs are already overstretched as it is. This is a threat from the Tories because they don't want to solve the real problem, which is a funding issue. Fewer and fewer medical students want to become GPs. This seven day ultimatum only makes the recruitment and retention situation worse for GPs.
    Which is why even where we have equivalent funding to the rest of the developed world we get worse results? More funding adds luxuries, not essentials, and we fail on the essentials.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emma:-))
    While i agree that that is a good idea (timewasters do need to be got rid of) there will be people on low incomes etc who genuinely cant afford it, however nominal the fee may be. Something does need to be done about time wasters though.
    The poor have to prioritise amongst food and transport and soap and gas and clothing and stationery for their children's' education and a myriad of other important things. Increasingly the same is true regarding housing. It is perfectly reasonable to require them to do the same for G.P. appointments. No-one is suggesting that benefits are not increased to cover say 3 or 4 medical appointments a year, say £40 in total a year. There is no need to fix the fees for the poor at the true cost of G.P. appointments. It just needs to be high enough for someone to think twice before spending the money.

    You may say that this will not cover someone who has to go to see the doctor more than 4 times a year, but some people pay 50p for the bus to the nearest supermarket and others pay £5. The fact that different aspects of people's living costs varies is just a fact of life.

    They could do the same and charge nominal fees for the fee-exempt vexatious litigants who are cluttering up the courts and tribunals.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emma:-))
    While i agree that that is a good idea (timewasters do need to be got rid of) there will be people on low incomes etc who genuinely cant afford it, however nominal the fee may be. Something does need to be done about time wasters though.
    Don't expect a right-winger to care.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Which is why even where we have equivalent funding to the rest of the developed world we get worse results? More funding adds luxuries, not essentials, and we fail on the essentials.
    We get worse results due to a top heavy system, having more managers & less doctors. Instead of increasing the number of doctors, we increase bureaucracy and bureaucrats. And we increase their hours. This leads to burn out and more doctors leaving the profession. We are forced to replace them with temps and locums on agency that cost a lot more money than directly employing doctors. The agency docs are also less competent.

    The same thing is happening in Education particularly secondary school education so you can't blame it on the NHS. There's a lot of money paid into the schools which end up in the pockets of Academy bureaucrats and not in the school itself, so they are increasing teaching time, but not number of teachers (who are leaving in droves). They are also unskilled staff to teach, paying very low wages.

    We are the 6th largest economy. The issue is NOT the lack of money. It is where the money has gone -- and not in doctors/hospitals or teachers/schools.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by medicine4lyf)
    GPs urged to commit to seven-day service or lose funding

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38620935

    The government really doesn't have a clue. How do they expect this to happen? Spreading the same work force over a greater time, with the move to increase doctors marginally that won't take affect for another 5/6 years, this really isn't the solution. Thoughts?
    The increased hours will force the docs to leave for better jobs abroad -- goodbye UK, hello Australia, New Zealand, China and Dubai.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Which is why even where we have equivalent funding to the rest of the developed world we get worse results? More funding adds luxuries, not essentials, and we fail on the essentials.
    Really its a lack of interest in investing in infrastructure to lighten the burden, because its not immediate results and in fact next govt steals the credit. Something like fewest beds, doctors/nurses per patients in the EU, plus we pay less as a %GDP relative to our EU colleagues.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.