Consulting the public about the NHS
BMJ 2000; 320 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1553 (Published 10 June 2000) Cite this as: BMJ 2000;320:1553
All rapid responses
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.
Consulting the public? Who is really going to read the answers to
the 12million leaflets and take public opinions on board? How is the
Government going to prove they have consulted and not ignored? The
impossibility of this task ensures that our public will not waste their
time in replying.
The public want to be heard. Victims who have been subjected to
bureaucratic barriers in the NHS have suffered over years and their voice
has been silenced.
The NHS needs a culture change to one of listening and responding and
showing that Public concerns are answered with the truth. Our campaign
has been overwelmed with those that seek a voice. To simply know the
truth about how the system has failed them and by expecting those in
authority to take steps in changing such a faulty system.
Where can the NHS improve? Simply by no longer denying that both the
health-givers and health-receivers have equal rights and opportunity to
have a voice.
Can the NHS bureaucracy take the first step in emerging from the
closed door culture into the light?
Competing interests: No competing interests
Public expect some decisions to be made on their behalf
Editor - We professionals may wish the public to be involved in
"real" consultation1 but they also don't want to have to make decisions
that professionals and politicians should be making: in ourqualitative
research with members of the public, we have found a consistent view over
years that the public expect some decisions to be made on their behalf
(assuming we engage them in the debate)2, 3
They do not wish us to duck decision-making in the name of
consultation. This is particularly so in relation to public health; water
fluoridation a good current example of this.
1 Anderson W, Florin D. Consulting the public about the NHS. BMJ
2000; 320: 1553-1554.
2 Hastings GB, Hughes K, Lawther S, Lowry R. The Role of the Public
in Water Fluoridation: Public Health Champions or Anti-fluoridation
Freedom Fighters? British Dental Journal 1998; 184: 39 -41.
3 Lowry R, Thomson B, Lennon M. How much do the general public want
to be involved in decisions on implementing water fluoridation? British
Dental Journal 2000; 188: 500-502.
Dr R J Lowry
Consultant in Public Health Medicine
Gateshead and South Tyne Health Authority,
Ingham House,
Horsley Hill Road,
South Shields
NE33 3BN
Competing interests: No competing interests