Commentators

Partly Sunny with Showers 10° London Hi 14°C / Lo 9°C

Adrian Hamilton: I'd rather see my own doctor, please

If a GP won't take responsibility for you, who in the whole system will?

It has been six months since my doctor retired from the inner London surgery where I am registered. So I asked to whom I was being re-assigned. "I'm afraid we haven't got round to it yet, I think," he said, before adding: "Anyhow, we're rather moving away from that now."

Precisely so. Ministers cheerfully talk about choice and how the new front line of the health service is to be the doctor's surgery. The modernised NHS, they declare, is going to be a world of efficiency and immediacy, a land of super-surgeries, immediate appointments, rapid testing and consumer control.

What they don't say is that it is also becoming a world where no one is finally responsible for you, where the GP you see is no longer "your" doctor, but the one that is available, a processor of your symptoms by quick reference to your file on the screen.

That may suit some patients. When you are young it doesn't really matter who you see at the surgery: you've fallen off your bike, got kicked in a rugby match, gone down with a fever, feel pain in your stomach. Your past, your health profile, is not important. What you want is instant attention and a ready cure.

But once you start developing a history and once you start to get older, the value – indeed, the need – of seeing a doctor who knows your case increases by the visit. At the very least, it saves you having to go through once again all the details of your past record, the fact you had rheumatism as a child, or a miscarriage or the delicacies of mental problems. And, at best, it improves the chance of getting a diagnosis that takes into account your peculiar condition.

It is easy enough to see what the health bodies are up to. In a political climate obsessed with targets, the name of the game in the NHS is "outcomes". Conversations with a doctor have become dominated by talk of averages and statistics. Symptoms, pills and diagnosis are all reduced to a statistical norm of side-effects for this pill, normal readings for your age, the likelihood of symptoms arising from this condition or that. Numbers are what matter, not people, as much as to funnel them through the system in minimum time as to meet their individual need.

This suits not just the system but the doctors too. Leaving aside the question of whether the remuneration package for doctors has been over-generous (it probably has but envy is a corrosive emotion) the effect has been a noticeable tightening of doctor's hours. The more the doctor is paid for readily achievable outcomes, the less incentive there is to put in extra hours. That is particularly so where there are married couples in a practice – as in mine – where the partners can now organise their working hours to suit their parental needs. Even if you are assigned a doctor, an appointments system that prevents you booking slots more than a fortnight ahead makes it extremely difficult to arrange time for reviews.

It is fine for the providers. It might even help improve the outcome statistics. But it is not fine for the patients. The old doctor-patient relationship may have been cumbersome, inefficient in managerial terms. But it did answer to the needs of the patient in what, for many, is the most specific and personal part of their lives. If a doctor doesn't take responsibility for you, who in the whole system is responsible?

a.hamilton@independent.co.uk

More from Adrian Hamilton

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

an appointments system that prevents you booking slots more than a fortnight ahead
[info]journeyman01 wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 04:23 am (UTC)
Really? in which surgeries does this happen? At my surgery, there is NO, repeat, NO chance of booking ahead. You're told to "ring in the morning at 8.30 to see if there are any slots available". I did once mention that this was against all the hem hem rules that hem hem Bliar brought in and defended on television. "Ah", I'm told, "that's because we never know which doctors are going to be in". Absolutely super - what a way to run a health service. Pathetic.
[info]adey_t wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 07:55 am (UTC)
There is an answer to this, go private. You will have to put up with the thought of the huge sums being wasted by an incompetent government that for some bizarre reason thinks it knows how to run a health care system, but at least you can see a GP who seems to be interested in your problem at a convenient time.
We used to have doctors
[info]hodgeey wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 08:54 am (UTC)
Now we have polyclinics and bossy receptionists to decide our fate.

The NHS now resemble a subdivision of the National Lottery.

Another part of Bliar's legacy.
its not all bad
[info]shergar999 wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 09:24 am (UTC)
If I call my group practice, I can usually see a doctor within 24 hr. May be a day longer to see a specific doctor.(I always see the same chap he's been there for years we chat about cars etc.) I can also make an appointment for next week or next month if it suits me.More usually I go to see the practice nurses, again at a time that suits me.I am a bit old-fashioned about punctuality and they always call me into their surgery bang on time.They are friendly, very competent and have plenty of time for treatment and general chat. If a relative emergency crops up, we have a bright clean and new NHS walk-in centre half a mile away where we can see a doctor any time of the day. (ample free parking) Also I can request a telephone consultation with doctors and nurses usually within an hour or two. This is Wallasey North Wirral
its not all grim oop north!
Re: its not all bad
[info]hodgeey wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 09:40 am (UTC)
It's grim in Darlington.

They have a NHS walk-in centre staffed by nurses masquerading as doctors, who diagnose you with a computer programme, tell you there's nothing wrong and to take a painkiller and see your doctor after the weekend. By that time the condition which you had and which your doctor knows about has reared its head and you are bedridden for a week.
face to face, your GP is best
[info]tuskerdeman wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 10:09 am (UTC)
Even now this smokescreen issue hides even more serious and devious practices within Westminster. Theses issues of public concern promoting furore, debate and distraction hides what is truly happening, by quietly invoking into law, further "legal" abuses to our personal private data whilst our backs are turned.

Big issue, very important, read here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/24/jacqui-smith-dna-profile-database

Beyond financial charades, corporate abuses, ministers expenses and many other issues that have become public knowledge in recent times,

"the people" are denied proper and open debate on our basic freedoms.

We must stop this.

The Executive Branch of Westminster must warrant the closest scrutiny and investigation on all of the events of recent times immediately.

Write to your MPs, form action groups, contact anyone that may assist in putting a stop to this crime against the people.
At TIMES POLICE is the answer
[info]famulla wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 11:53 am (UTC)
'Manhood sliced off by cop'
Oooh it may be good face to face at times but I think it is back to the hospitals at times
The cop dragged him unconscious into the garage, yanked his trousers down and committed what was described as ' an act of barbarity'.
The Gendarme appeared before a judge and was remanded in custody. He was said to be on suicide watch last night and faces 30 years behind bars.
His victim suffered what was described as ' irreparable damage'.
No I mean I agree to all I say .this story pooped in the net as was writing and trying to defend your doctor. The police come and the doctor has to look at the bottom not face to face here at least .shame is it not. It just doesn?t work at times I feel sad and bad but why do you say face to face?
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2447319/Manhood-sliced-off-by-cop.html
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
I'd rather see my own doctor
[info]martin_hayes wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 02:34 pm (UTC)
The answer is that the patient is responsible, indeed, must needs be responsible. The bean counters have won; their programmatic approach is antithetical to the human and instinctive, which was the domain in which doctors, who had control over their time, once practised; in fine, the joy of diagnostics, everything that once made medical practice rewarding, has been driven into permanent abeyance by instrumentalism and the itch to control. Expect everything to get worse now that public money is drying up.

Thus it is now doubly urgent that patients become learned about their maladies, available treatments, prognosis (if you can get one), and risks and benefits. Take some responsibility. Your resource is now Dr. Google, plus a goodly measure of nous. Acquaint yourself with the science; learn about how studies work, what they can prove, and the empirical method. Read Ben Goldacre. Know your drugs.

Contrast Germany, where many doctors still perform house calls. The NHS has taken a wrong turn. Good practice, tested by time, has been abandoned in favour of soul-crushing, sausage factory outcomes. It's your health at stake. Work with the many good people in the NHS to improve your quality of life by being a grown-up and understanding how medicine works and its limits. Understand that many available treatments (that you're told about) are a quotient of what the bean counters will tolerate. Push harder. Don't be a credulous baby. Your doctor means the best for you, but they are now working under intolerable conditions. Work with them.
It sounds like your doctor gave you some happy pills Adrian
[info]kuma2000 wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 07:10 pm (UTC)
For most of the country "my dcotor" is a useless term. My doctor was actually so bad - so bad in fact that he put my wife in hospital and she now tries to last out until the weekend when she can the emergency doctor - that I don't go to the doctor anymore; now I'm self-employed I don't need a sick note and my doctor never had anymore apparent knowledge than I did. They also have a rather naive assumption that when you are ill it last for several weeks: "I'm feeling really ill", "Let me see, I have an appointment available in 3 weeks time", "Can't I see someone today", "You can have an emergency appointment", "Great", "But you have to phone up before 8am to see if there is one available", "Sorry but I was vomitting too much to be able to talk on the phone then".
My guess is you live in one of these wealthy areas where GP provision seems to be somewhat better than elsewhere - I experienced this when I was fortunate enough for a short period of time to live in Henley upon Thames - an empty surgery mostly with grandmas popping in for a chat, so different to my rundown corner of reading full of sick poor people and screaming children.
To a system which cannot get worse any changes I hope will be for the better.
A view common to many GPs
[info]midgley wrote:
Monday, 25 May 2009 at 10:42 pm (UTC)
Some changes have been good, some bad.

Losing personal lists is a bad one.

And not one pressed by the profession.

Government Policy
[info]treforr wrote:
Tuesday, 26 May 2009 at 09:07 am (UTC)
I have been a GP for over 20 years and I too am saddened that the traditional GP patient relationship has in effect come to an end.

This is a result of a Government (and possibly a media) campaign to denegrate GPs and make them look greedy and uncaring. The ongoing 24 hour responsibility that we had which was one of the cornerstones of ongoing care was taken away from us as the Government thought we were not doing well. They have since realised we were doing it very efficiently, cheaply and professionally.

Unfortunatley, it is now too late and Adrian will probably never get such a relationship with one doctor again, unless he finds a private GP who is in his early 40s. Anyone older and the GP will retire (as I am going to) within the next 5 to 10 years. Anyone younger will not understand the point of the above article.


Dr Trefor Roscoe

Panic and reality
[info]famulla wrote:
Tuesday, 26 May 2009 at 01:06 pm (UTC)
The doctors when you are in the knife or a bullet wound will want to see the police first .
I thank you
Firozali A.Mulla
[info]journeyrose wrote:
Wednesday, 27 May 2009 at 03:07 am (UTC)
Ouch, maybe our American system is not so bad after all. I have to keep working even though I am disabled and too sick to work--just so I can keep my health insurance so I can see my doctor. I finally found one willing to look into a rare disease and figure out a regime to keep me going. Yes, this costs me about half of my income. But maybe it is worth it.

Columnist Comments

dominic_lawson

Dominic Lawson: Why the British will never love Europe

'The Continent' we called it, knowing we were not of it

mary_dejevsky

Mary Dejevsky: Incentives that work the wrong way

London Metropolitan University is a very far cry indeed from Oxbridge

thomas_sutcliffe

Tom Sutcliffe: Should we pay double to save the bookshop?

A civilized city without bookshops struck me as a contradiction in terms


Loading...


Most popular in Opinion