Agreed. And to reply also to Jon Rogers' point, we poor solo suckers might
have the same voting rights as an eight-handed practice, but we would have
to go to 8 times as many f***ing (evening, always evening) meetings as any
individual partner in one of the above.
I am sick and tired of meetings. I am sick and tired of being present in
order to allow the HA to say they have *consulted* the profession rather
than to achieve very much.
Sad to see Ruth L trotting out the old "either we get in and mould things
or other people will do it for us" line. (sorry for the paraphrasing,
Ruth.) I remember that being said when I was *persuaded* to go fund-holding
to protect the interests of small practices in this area. Bollo. Got
shafted by the HA anyway.
No apologies for being a Luddite, martyred cynic. We can sit on as many
committees, PCGs etc and we will still get shafted unless the profession
sticks together.No matter what anyone says, they CANNOT impose anything
above level 1 without consent and co-operation from us. Are we going to
give that without adequate payment?.....of course, because there will
always be people who are willing to 'give it a go' and hang the
consequences......
Any PCbloodyG round here better not hold their breath though!
Graham Balin (dangerous)
"A little learning is a dangerous thing"
----------
> From: Ahmad Risk <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Of Luddites and Martyrs
> Date: 19 March 1998 12:09
>
> On 03/19/98 10:36:48, "abayomi.mcewen" <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> >WE are all talking as if only GPS will be voting. Surely all the other
> >professions ( pharmacsists social workers etc)and patients will be
> >represented on 'the management board' whatever that will be. It will be
> >a very politacal lifestyle lobbying all those to think and vote like
> >you against your 'big' colleagues. THere are many ways of skinnin a
> >chicken and you are very crearive Ahmad have some fun with the new
> >systyem! We're all talking as though it's all set in stone while we
> >only have a statement of intent at the moment.
>
> No, Yomi. We do not have just a 'statement of intent', we have a
> fully blown 'intent with aforethought'. A statement of indecent would
> read: "we intend to do this, what do you all think?"
>
> What we have is a very advanced stage of formation. Some PCGS have even
> elected their 'Executive'. Legislation will be before parliament soon.
> The date of April 1999 is already in Health Service Circulars.
>
> I do not call all that just a 'statement of intent'.
>
> The other point I wish to make is this:
>
> We would be seriously kidding ourselves if anybody thought that these
> Groups and their 'Boards' were not dominated by the GPs. In my area,
> *all* discussions have been with GPs only. I wonder what other areas
> are doing? I know that there are groups who are talking with other
> constituencies, however, history tells us that the bottom line is
> this:
>
> In the Surgery, the patient wants to see 'the doctor'. This may be
> changing, nevertheless, it is still a very powerful embedded cultural
> trait. Inevitably, much of the PCG work will be doctor driven. It's
> just the way the cookie crumbles!
>
> I am not debating here the merits or otherwise of that. It may even be
> awfully politically incorrect to speak in those terms. I am merely
> observing and describing.
>
> The fact remains: for me, as solo GP, to influence the decision
> making process, I shall *always* have to work much harder. I submit
> that this is morally and ethically wrong.
>
> Ahmad
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Dr Ahmad Risk
> http://www.cybermedic.org
> Chairman British Healthcare Internet Association <http://www.bhia.org>
> Director Internet Healthcare Coalition - USA <http://www.ihc.net>
>
> Home: +44 1273 724866/748198
> Work: +44(1737)240022 Fax: +44 1737 244660
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|