I suggest a campaign about ...

Don't hand our NHS over to private individuals called GPs

The governments proposals are to hand 800 hundred billion of tax payers money over to GPs to do what in 'their judgement ' is best for us. The controls at the moment are not robust enough to ensure that the GPs don't consider their own profits first. There is no limit on their potential personal earnings from this new arrangement. The conflicts of interest therefore are many and not all GPs are saints.

269 votes
Sign in
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    lisa davies shared this idea  ·   ·  Admin →


    Sign in
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      • Gartland commented  · 

        To tally with the October 24th 2013 comment by Anonymous: on 17th October at a rally in London held unusually by the two largest teaching Unions the NUT and NASUWT acting in concert, what was said by the thousands of mainly young teachers marching was that the pressure of work was immense and could not be managed. Seven day weeks, twelve hour days, work during holidays and the stress of facing often hostile classes are now coupled with poorer pensions, longer working lives, (a nonsense in the case of worn out teachers) and deregulated conditions by which heads and governors pay according to "performance". As Anonymous says of the doctors, there is no time to recuperate in order to consider difficult problems. This is a rat-like market.

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        Anonymous Re your comments of Dec11 2011, We're the same age group of doctors & gender. It seems that we followed similar career options. I agree with you completely. Also I wasn't examining specifically for cancer, but looking for other gynae pathology which is more easily detected by internal exam.

        About 35 years ago many young Doctors went to USA for a busman's holiday & returned appauled by the way doctors over there ripped off the system. We wanted to stay in the NHS although income was much less.

        Our low income was offset by free hospital accommodation as SHO's subsidised meals & no debt for our uni education. The last reason to go into medicine at any level was money. We worked long hours (under less pressure) & didn't come into money until we'd worked many years.
        Young doctors don't have these perks & have to pay the debt of uni fees.

        I agreed totally with the very strict moral & ethical code of practice in the past. We were held in a position of trust & our private lives had to justify that trust. Our total focus was on giving the best patient care we could. Now, saving the NHS money is a major concern, to avoid finacial penalisation or internal enquiry.

        Most of the older GP's I know went part time years ago to maintain standards & sanity. Working part time entails from 8.00am to 3.00pm or 12.30 -7.00pm without a break as the norm, so their income is about 50K.

        Some of us feel that successive governments have piled on the pressure trying to force a mass resignation from the NHS resulting in privatisation as was done to the dentists in about 1975.
        Older GP's repeatedly comment "We trained to treat patients not all this finance & endless paper work". I think that the public are unaware that seeing patients in surgery is only about 20% of the total work load. We're coming up to retirement now. There's the referral letters to hospital, reading the replies & implementing the recommendations, repeat prescriptions, checking the results of tests phone in advice, discussing problems with the plethora of other health care professionals, home visits, & more! Much pressure comes from having to work too fast, with no time for reflection over difficult or unusual problems.

        Preserving the NHS rests on younger shoulders with different attitudes, but very very much a case of, "how much work can you do in the hours available & above all maintain patient safety?".
        IMO the gradual administrative structural changes in both hospitals & GP facilitate a privatised system across medicine, & this is the ultimate goal of government irrespective of party, but the doctors will get the blame as did the dentists. A bad press about a very small minority, is alienating all of us from the public
        Yes, it is in the interests of many doctors to start to form liasons with private service providers, but because that's where they see their future work going,
        & very soon.

        *Closer supervision is indeed needed, but the info I'm getting is that much larger amounts of the cash are needed for such things as rental of surgeries etc. leaving less than they hoped for patient care. Supervision is needed to show where responsibility does indeed lie when the system crashes. The cost of treatments rockets faster than the money allotted. Yes concerns have been raised to our professional bodies for years, & the governments ignored us.* Not one professional medical body approved of the Langsley reforms.

        Please also look at the leverage being used against GP's as we head towards the inevitable.

      • Anthony and Theresa Waterhouse commented  · 

        The NHS trusts have a tiny economic democracy built into them by having multi stakeholder elected representation. This needs strengthening with at least meaningful accoutebility to trust members which is open to any citizen in the catchment area. The general meetings should be true assemblies holding the trust and its governing body to account. This same principle can be extended to the GP Commisioning bodies. As things stand the GPs are a privileged stakeholder group, the other stakeholders, other staff, citizens need democratic empowerment and representation. We need to reclaim ownership of the NHS from the corporate fat rats.

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        i have to say that my gp is very good. i feel less likely to be 'lost in the system' if being treated by him. our hospital, though very good , does feel like a factory and the waiting around in reception is long and stressful.

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        Hello Ross Learmouth,
        Thank you for your replies also,I tried to reply to your previous post but the program would not accept it.
        I am over 60, & female, so I have also been at the recieving end of gynaecological examinations. Fortunately my experience was not traumatic. I think that to body scan every woman on the contraceptive pill would not be practicable financially given that the large numbers requiring the service, would necessitate unacceptable numbers of scanners & the technicians use them plus doctors to interpret them.
        More importantly, a body scanner is not user friendly. I have also had a head scan as a patient. I am not the slightest claustrophobic but it was an unpleasant experience. Many many patients find a body scan distressing for that reason.

        No I haven't ignored the information presented. If you want to stop routine pelvic examinations you need to place your complaint to the appropriate governmen dept. I am more than aware of "Dr"Harry Shipman. The number of murders he committed is as far as I'm aware unknown, but he admitted to over 120 as far as I remember. I think he was admitted for detox & rehab for drug abuse earlier. MY question is WHY didn't his colleagues pick up on it, & report him much much earlier.
        I am also aware of the wrongs done regarding post mortem organs preserved illegally & without consent on a countrywide basis.

        We are both here to try to find an arguement to combat the Langsley recommendations.
        Have I understood correctly that the arguement you propose is that if some GP's have breached their priviledge of trust & ethical code to the point of murder & sexual abuse, they cannot be trusted with £ 8 billion of tax payers money?
        This arguement will only carry weight if it applies to a high percentage of GPs.
        & would be better if it demonstrated untrustworthiness with money. eg. prosecution for tax evasion, fraudulent claims for work not done, theft, benefitting from patient's wills.

        As the "books" have always been checked annually by accountants, & have been kept by practice managers for many years now, I doubt that there will be many cases.

        What this forum needs to be aware of is that we are dangerously close to privatisation of GP which can be brought about at any point after Lansley has been implemented by pressure from the government by increasing the work load of GP's forcing their mass resignation. This is very similar to what the government did to the NHS dentists in the mid 70's.
        Now please can we apply our efforts to how to out manoeuver the governments game of forcing doctors to privatise.
        They've taken similar steps in hospitals by intalling a large tier of managers/administrators/ & finance dept all more highly paid than clinicians except for consultants & totally unnecessary in the NHS but essential for a private hospital.

        I have come to this forum to give you all inside information, which is difficult to obtain in an attempt to save the health service from privatisation. I did not come here to be attacked, or try to explain why I did internal examinations on women 25 years ago before body scans were in use.
        It is obvious to me my input is of no use.

      • Ross Learmonth commented  · 

        Hello again Anonymous,

        I had to go out earlier today, urgently, and my flow has been disturbed. I apologise profusely for that.

        You have chosen to ignore all the mass of documentary evidence that the pelvic examination on non-symptomatic women is worthless, a waste of time. Try a body scan and see the difference.

        One of the main differences is that body scanning does not humiliate females in the presence of male doctors (and students). But I don't think they will vote for it. Guess why?

        So that's probably why, all these years after man set foot on the moon's surface, that convenient hand-held scanners have not been invented. To be used with the patient's (victim's) clothes ON!

        Look at all the research-based evidence that the mainstay of male dominated gynaecology, i.e. the much loved "internal examination" is worthless in non-symptomatic women. If you can detect cancer with your fingers (up there), the pain and blood loss would be considerable before you ever started, i.e. it would not be non-symptomatic. It would be frighteningly, screamingly, positively, symptomatic. For sure.

        It would make the toothache seem like a whole lot of fun.

        So come off it! Be honest. Forget the brainwashing you have been through. From men.

        If you are struggling to find references, I would be happy to oblige (not at this time of night).

        I am interested in your viewpoint.

        If you, or any of the male perverts, could detect cancer by pushing your fingers into non-symptomatic cavities in women, it would be astonishing. A Nobel Prize for Medicine would soon be winging its way to you.

        I note with considerable interest that you hide behind the highly imaginative, resourceful use of that well known escape route, "Anonymous".

        If I was a medical pervert so would I. Don't blame you at all.

        Best wishes.


      • Ross Learmonth commented  · 

        Thank you for your reply, Anonymous.

        My comments were aimed at male doctors mainly. But not entirely.

        The dreadful crimes that are well documented by the media, available on the internet, are men on women crimes. The list is growing. My comments were aimed at male doctors, and evil practises such as covert examinations on anaesetised women and examination by students without informed consent. Not to mention keeping the body parts of dead infants in specimen jars for years, unknown to the parents, or anybody else. Does the hospital name Alder Hey in Liverpool ring any bells?

        I applaud the growing number of young, smart women now forcing their way into medicine, Gynaecology, in particular.

        But the male domination of medicine over time is unarguable. Have you read the excellent paper "Waking Sleeping Beauty" by Carolyn Lewis. Although this is an American paper, it contains evidence of how a male-dominated medical "profession" regards and treats women.

        Have you noted the crimes (and alleged crimes) of Dr Paul Vinnel, Dr Steven R. Pack, Dr Ben Ramaley, Dr Antonio Ramada, Dr Dale, Fetroe, Dr William Hagenmeyer, Dr Peter Lafuria. If that lot does not stop you dead in your tracks, try Dr Aniruddha Chitale. Truly horrifying.

        I'm sorry, Anonymous, that I really don't think this is a suitable place to give a graphic detailed description of these crimes by male doctors against women.

        The arrogance of the medical "profession" is legend. They think they can get away with murder. And the most prolific serial killer in Britain was a doctor. See if you can remember his name. Or the number of patients he murdered when he decided they had lived long enough.

        I am dancing with joy at the growing world-wide movement against male gynaecologists and their "non-sexual" nonsense. The examples given above prove unequivocally that they are indeed highly sexual encounters, for the doctors, at least.

        Overpaid liars. No, I don't want to see the National Health Service Handed over to them.

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        Ross Learmonth, may I answer some of your statements from a different viewpoint.
        When I qualified, all doctors were required to conduct an exemplary private life. We could be strongly disciplined for adultery even if it did not involve a patient, & certainly drunk driving. This was to protect patients from the "perverts" you describe.

        Re. abhortion. This is controled by legislation. Certain criteria had to be met before an abhortion could be granted. They involved the medical & psychiatric illness of the person seeking abhortion & the well being of existing family. I returned to hospital work 30 years ago & do not know the current legislation because it was nolonger pertinantto my job.

        I agree, that I wish we could concentrate on sick people but public & government have burdened us with other issues, probably because the GP is best placed to confirm the legal criteria are met re abhortion & contraception has health implications.

        You may not be aware that breast examination, internal examination, & cervical smear used to be required prior to prescribing the contraceptive pill to ensure that there was no evidence of cancer, which would grow more rapidly than usual under the influence of the hormones in the contraceptive pill. similarly Blood Pressure should be closely monitored. As sexual experience became commoner at a younger age, the onset of cervical cancer plummeted to the 20's. Failure to screen for these illnesses prior to prescribing the contraceptive pill is deemed to be negligent, & the advice is that alternative methods be sought. Cervical smears were once required every 3 years. I do not know current recommendations. Everyone will agree that these examinations will miss smaller growths, but at least we should detect the larger ones. Nothing in medicine is 100% accurate.
        As a female doctor I had no enjoyment whatsoever from such examinations, nor any examination. However many GP practices do not have a female doctor available all the time for such examinations. It presents problems to the female doctors such as myself, competant in gynaecology but it is not my best area. Your complaints are against what we are required to do, & failure to comply with these requirements exposed us to litigation & discplinary action for negligence should there be adverse sequelae, & perhaps rightly so, when there are alternative methods of contraception.

        I deplore any abuse of patient trust, by "perverts" & in any other way, & would both advise & assist a patient in making a complaint leading to disciplinary action in such cases & have indeed done so.

        I checked the average GP salary for a 12 hour day without a break locally in the South of England, 3 days ago. It's £100K -£105K. The work load depends on list size which we are no longer able to limit by government ruling, age distribution, & patient income. Poor patients are genuinely more illness prone than richer patients.
        As a hospital doctor of over 20 years standing, immediately below consultant status, my salary was just less than a nursing sister, 1/2 way up her promotion ladder, & in her mid 20's.
        Yes, a GP can "make" £250K by working outside the NHS for a day in the private field, by contract with his partners, eg for industry - Occupational Health or Insurance companies. Private medicine is ridiculously lucrative.

        My feeling reading these posts, is that I regret having done medicine because of the long hours, (out of hours rate 1/3 basic time in hospital) I would have been infinitely wealthier & had time for recreation had I trained in law. To be met by vehement hatred for defending the NHS & especially my patients to the hilt throughout my working life, hurts deeply. I've only met 2 "bad apples" as colleages, & worked with over 1,000 doctors during my life. My "powers" were used to fight to try to get my patients the care they needed, & wanted especially those with severe mental illness & the elderly.

        The powers I was referring to, were powers to advocate on behalf of the patient eg the patient who wishes to go into sheltered accommodation, or indeed to ensure they are properly supported should they wish to remain at home, and bringing pressure to bear on junior doctors who refused to admit a patient to hospital when they needed hospital care.

        My point is that most GP's don't want Langley's "reforms" & have protested through their professional body but been ignored by government.
        they have repeatedly protested about many of the reforms which resulted in a reduction of health care, warned of the consequences, & been ignored.

      • Ross Learmonth commented  · 


        I am very happy to have GPs "stripped of all powers". Jumping for joy, in fact. These arrogant self seekers are being found out on a daily basis.

        Why should GPs have the right to say who gets an abortion and who doesn't?

        And don't give me all that tosh about "conscience". Would a road sweeper or postman/woman who refused to do his/her job because of "conscience" get much public sympathy? If doctors' conscience bothers them that much they can seek employment as a road sweeper, or post person. Or anything.

        Who gets the "morning after pill" and who does not? Or who gets the contraceptive pill and who does not? That is legislation. Enshrined in law by Parliament, Her Majesty's Government. Nothing to do with doctors. It's the law!

        Why don't they concentrate on curing illness, which is, after all, what they are being paid approximately quarter of a million pounds sterling for each year. While nurses wages are as low as they can be.

        I also detest the fact that these perverts are still forcing women (blackmailing them) into getting a full internal, breast and speculum examination, carried out by men, possibly (probably) with male students looking on, in order to get contraception. This is the ritual humiliation of "vulnerable" women for doctors' own sexual gratification, and power. See the internet lists of male doctors "struck off" for sexual assault on their patients. Again, I cannot give examples because the horrendous crimes against both anaesthetised and conscious women is chilling, beyond belief. This will be very disturbing reading to the unprepared, innocent patient or her partner.

        All women seeking contraception, who are faced with the prospect of "obey the good doctor, it's for your own good, or it's no, no" are "vulnerable" to submitting to this totally unnecessary humiliation. Imagine what would happen if they insisted that in order to get a driving licence, women had to have "internals". I hope there would be rioting in the streets. This is actually still law in Lithuania (about to be changed) and there is talk of it being introduced in Saudia Arabia, where women are demanding the right to drive. Good old doctors eh, they never miss a trick!

        Every man and woman really should research the history of pelvic examinations, legally enforceable in some cases, from the 1930s in America and later in Britain.
        Find out what was involved in the pre-marital female examination in Britain and America up until about the mid 1960s. I'd better not reveal this because most readers would simply not believe me. I might have an enforced interview with the cops if I did. Please research it for yourselves.

        The World Health Organisation guidelines say that only a satisfactory blood pressure reading is necessary to qualify all women for oral contraception.

        120/70 will do fine for everyone. Available online without the need to go anywhere near a medical pervert, oops sorry, doctor. But it costs money. I'd happily pay all my pocket money to avoid them!

        But still the scandal of totally unnecessary sexual examination of women continues at the hands of "the caring profession".

        There is very little useful clinical information that can be obtained from pelvic examination of women. But it's good fun for all the boys though.

        There is masses of research based evidence to back this up, including recent research by the Lothian Health Board. Find it and read it, please.

        I am utterly delighted that these power hungry perverts are losing their power. Not before time!

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        I was a GP 30 years ago, remain in contact with colleagues & am saddened by people's perception of GP's
        I agree that there has been inexorable progression to an ultimate goal of privatisation of the NHS since the reorganisation under Thatcher. We are contracted to work for the government who dictate the terms & service of our contract. I foresee that by increasing their demands to the impossible, the government will force GP's into privatisation as was done to the dentists in the 1970's if the Langsley recommendations are implemented. NHS doctors do not want this, nor do they want increased unnecessary administration. Their protests have been ignored, & they have been stripped of all power by successive governments. I'm joining the general public as the only means to save the NHS

      • Sheila Gardner commented  · 

        GPs are like the rest of the medical profession, arrogant and rude people. They do not deserve the money they get now and to give them more will be a disaster for us tax payers.

      • susan commented  · 

        Everyone assumes GP's are benevolent figures. Harold Shipman was a GP.
        GP's are privately contracted & not part of the health service. They already stictched a good deal for themselves by weaseling out of working all on call & weekend hours. In my area we now have to rely on NHS Direct for emergency cover. This is unsafe & not good enough for the pay GP's receive. Don't give them even more power

      • Tee commented  · 

        GP's are against this idea, and i feel GP's should be free to refer people for x-rays and tests adn treatments without having to go through yet another hurdle to jump over

      • Victor commented  · 

        Not to forget Doctors Fee's are going to rocket because there is additional Administration Costs that have to be made for this new work load and its continious running costs. This cost will of course came out of money that could have otherwise gone towards patient care. Also just how much are these Administration and Accountancy costs going to be each year ? Have you seen how much extra Administration and Accountancy costs can be, as they are not cheap. The cost will obviously vary from Doctors Surgery to Surgery but it will be expensive especially when you consider that this money is suppose to go towards Patient Care !

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        GPs don't want this. They are doctors, not administrators and don't have the time to take on the work currently undertaken by others in full time jobs.

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        GPs don't want this. They are doctors, not administrators and don't have the time to take on the work currently undertaken by others in full time jobs.

      • Dorothea Saul commented  · 

        Ed Saul
        We need more care in the community. GP's in general can't find time to make home visits. They don't have time to manage the NHS.

      • Dorothea Saul commented  · 

        48years ago I became a staff nurse. Over the past 20 years I have watched politicians, administrators and managers destroy the great NHS which I worked for. Good GP's want to do what they were trained to do, CARE for their patients not run a business.The government should re-think this. it will not be good for the patients or for the GP's

      ← Previous 1

      Feedback and Knowledge Base