In article <[log in to unmask]>, Iain L M Hotchkies
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>The point has been made that there will be financial consequences of the
>increaesing number of women in GP. This is "a good thing" for many
>reasons, but it does mean that a higher proportion of GPs will be
>non-main-breadwinners in the househould and they may therefore care less
>about the gradually eroding financial value - in the gummint's eyes - of
>GPs in general.
Sadly I agree with you.
I am female. I am currently full time. I am not the main bread-winner.
But I care greatly about the erosion of financial value of GPs.
I recall a part-time female GP saying to me "26k for 4 sessions a week
is pretty good pocket money".
The *I'm alright jack* attitude prevalent among part-time women
irritates me intensely.
I could don flack jacket and risk saying part-time women irritate me -
but that would be going too far.
--
KT
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|