Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Following the successful GMC appeal against Leslie Burke, I feel that
we must consider the core purpose of the NHS. Is its purpose to serve the
best needs of society as a whole? If so it seems plausible that the
interests of society are not best served by keeping alive terminally ill
patients, and that the ruling was the correct one. Alternatively, if the
role of the NHS is to promote the interests of individual patients, then
we must surely need a serious assessment of whether doctors truly are the
best judges of patient’s interests. These are issues with which we must
engage.
Re: Leslie Burke Ruling
Dear Sir,
Following the successful GMC appeal against Leslie Burke, I feel that
we must consider the core purpose of the NHS. Is its purpose to serve the
best needs of society as a whole? If so it seems plausible that the
interests of society are not best served by keeping alive terminally ill
patients, and that the ruling was the correct one. Alternatively, if the
role of the NHS is to promote the interests of individual patients, then
we must surely need a serious assessment of whether doctors truly are the
best judges of patient’s interests. These are issues with which we must
engage.
Yours,
Michael Marks
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests