Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;335 (18 August), doi:10.1136/bmj.39308.477870.BD
Tony Delamothe, deputy editor, BMJ
tdelamothe@bmj.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
In this week's letters pages, Oliver Dearlove takes Roger Jones to task for his recent editorial on the future of the medical profession in Britain (doi: 10.1136/bmj.39303.684236.3A). According to Jones, "The Shipman, Bristol, and Alder Hey enquiries, and a litany of errors, shook the foundations of public trust and professional confidence." But where is the evidence for this, asks Dearlove? The foundations of public trust remain apparently unshaken: in poll after poll, doctors still top the league tables of public esteem while politicians languish at the bottom.
So how has Jones's unholy trinity emerged as a shorthand description of the problems afflicting the British medical profession in the late 20th century? They seem poor candidates for the burden they've been asked to bear. Take Harold Shipman: had he been an engineer rather than a general practitioner, nobody would have thought his serial killing reflected badly on his profession even
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses
UK medical students have published unreleased government plans to restrict failed asylum seekers' access to medical care