BMJ  2007;335:787-788 (20 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.39367.698125.BE

Letters

GPs' 24 hour responsibility

Summary of responses

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Slightly aggrieved at the suggestion that general practitioners' jobs are daytime only, many of the respondents to the head to head on whether GPs should resume 24 hour responsibility for their patients remind us that GPs do still provide out of hours care, albeit in different organisational set-ups.^{1 2} Most think that extending GPs' working hours back to those before the 2004 contract is neither feasible nor desirable—mainly because of increased workloads, doctors' and patients' safety, and a total lack of financial incentives. Few think that GPs should be expected to have to "opt in" again.

Respondents are indignant at the government and primary care trusts for not fully accepting that organising out of hours care is their responsibility under the new contract; for feeding the public perception (via the media) of GPs as overpaid, greedy, and lazy; for creating unrealistic expectations in patients as healthcare "consumers" entitled to have their . . . [Full text of this article]

BMJ, London WC1H 9JR

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Should general practitioners resume 24 hour responsibility for their patients? Yes

Roger Jones
BMJ 2007 335: 696. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Should general practitioners resume 24 hour responsibility for their patients? No

Helen Herbert
BMJ 2007 335: 697. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Online poll

Find out more>>