News4 mins ago
Thousands To Join First All-Out Doctors' Strike
// Doctors are concerned they will be under pressure to work longer hours, risking patient safety.//
… but they don’t mind risking patient safety today when they withdraw emergency cover at A&E and intensive care units. Hypocrites!
http://
… but they don’t mind risking patient safety today when they withdraw emergency cover at A&E and intensive care units. Hypocrites!
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"Junior doctors".....doctors in training, learning, watching and gaining experience. In the meantime they look to have a good ring fenced pension, 6 weeks a year pain holiday, study leave with pay.
Seems a good deal so far.
Weekends are normal days for juniors, why do they need or want extra money? Experience is there for them at weekends as well as during the week.....experience......experience.
For Peter Pendant......the BMA couldn't care a toss about Consultants, never did and never will.........
It is a disgrace that doctor who have a duty to care for the sick are going on strike. Total disgrace.
I mention this for the 4th time on AB.....have you noticed that the majority of "agitators" waving banners are WOMEN. Do i think that is significant......i certainly do. Training women to be doctors is in the main not cost effective.......that does not apply to ALL women.
The NHS needs changes......big, unpopular changes if it is to remain.
This all started because Jeremy Hunt apparently can't read a research paper properly. The claim he made that care at weekends is directly a cause of understaffing is simply not supported, not even by the very research he was using to justify this. Nor is it clear, to me at least, how keeping pay levels at the weekends essentially the same as before (I think it's still not clear how weekend pay would be affected, or there are contradictory reports; neither side has covered itself in glory on this point) would solve the understaffing problem anyway, unless you are forcing more doctors to work these hours.
In that sense, the motivations of the junior doctors aren't wholly unreasonable and aren't wholly financial either. Another way to see that would be by comparing the competing pay proposals; the Government's and the BMA's structures are very different hour-by-hour, but it looks to me that they end up giving doctors the same level of pay -- for any doctor who cycled evenly through all working hours, at least (indeed, my back-of-envelope estimates suggest that the government's offer is overall *more* generous*, not less, although of course the actual effect depends on the working pattern so this isn't meant to be definitive).
The problem is that I'm not sure any of this really matters any more. At some point, I feel that it's better from a democratic viewpoint that the government's decisions are the ones that that should be implemented. I've tried to phrase that last sentence carefully, and probably failed, because it's hard to avoid some sense of "imposing its will with an iron fist" that's not at all what I mean. But the government has the weight of democracy behind it, and there's only so far you can go in protesting its decisions. If this strike hasn't crossed that line already, then any further action will have for sure. The government's decision is based on a shaky interpretation of contested research with a bizarre and probably ineffective implementation -- but it's still our government's decision. If this strike doesn't change it, I think it would then be time for the doctors to accept the new contract, and to make it work as best they can. If it turns out that their predictions were, after all, true (and I suspect they will be, to some extent), then we can look at the contract again.
In that sense, the motivations of the junior doctors aren't wholly unreasonable and aren't wholly financial either. Another way to see that would be by comparing the competing pay proposals; the Government's and the BMA's structures are very different hour-by-hour, but it looks to me that they end up giving doctors the same level of pay -- for any doctor who cycled evenly through all working hours, at least (indeed, my back-of-envelope estimates suggest that the government's offer is overall *more* generous*, not less, although of course the actual effect depends on the working pattern so this isn't meant to be definitive).
The problem is that I'm not sure any of this really matters any more. At some point, I feel that it's better from a democratic viewpoint that the government's decisions are the ones that that should be implemented. I've tried to phrase that last sentence carefully, and probably failed, because it's hard to avoid some sense of "imposing its will with an iron fist" that's not at all what I mean. But the government has the weight of democracy behind it, and there's only so far you can go in protesting its decisions. If this strike hasn't crossed that line already, then any further action will have for sure. The government's decision is based on a shaky interpretation of contested research with a bizarre and probably ineffective implementation -- but it's still our government's decision. If this strike doesn't change it, I think it would then be time for the doctors to accept the new contract, and to make it work as best they can. If it turns out that their predictions were, after all, true (and I suspect they will be, to some extent), then we can look at the contract again.
Morning Sqad !
I too, think its a disgrace that doctors are going on strike, and Hunt should be ashamed of himself.
You have mentioned women doctors before. Not sure why women can't become doctors.....there seems to be an awful lot of them that are.
But I will leave the AB Sisters to discuss that point with you further !
I too, think its a disgrace that doctors are going on strike, and Hunt should be ashamed of himself.
You have mentioned women doctors before. Not sure why women can't become doctors.....there seems to be an awful lot of them that are.
But I will leave the AB Sisters to discuss that point with you further !
no nigh you have twisted your knickers into a logical knot
there comes a time when the junior can fly solo ( and becomes a consultant )
That reminds me - hey every bardy - when Nigh flies, she turns to the air hostess and says - you re as good as a pilot and perhaps worth more than him so why arent you flying this aircraft !
[ comment on dockworkers and doctors Nigh in case you say - whaaa ? ]
there comes a time when the junior can fly solo ( and becomes a consultant )
That reminds me - hey every bardy - when Nigh flies, she turns to the air hostess and says - you re as good as a pilot and perhaps worth more than him so why arent you flying this aircraft !
[ comment on dockworkers and doctors Nigh in case you say - whaaa ? ]
naomi............if you mean "qualified" in that they have a medical degree, then yes, they are qualified.
But if you mean that they are truly competent in their chosen field, then no, they are not qualified. Many if not all specialties need a post graduate qualification which includes a designate time in training.
But if you mean that they are truly competent in their chosen field, then no, they are not qualified. Many if not all specialties need a post graduate qualification which includes a designate time in training.
Jim......I wouldn't trust a research paper that came out of the NHS or any other governmental body.
Practicalities........be ill at the weekend and try and get a Consultant to come into the hospital. Many years ago a Sunday newspaper published a large article on the fact that the failure rate of post graduate diplomas were in some specialties a staggering 80% and these were the doctors that were operating on you at the weekend.
Practicalities........be ill at the weekend and try and get a Consultant to come into the hospital. Many years ago a Sunday newspaper published a large article on the fact that the failure rate of post graduate diplomas were in some specialties a staggering 80% and these were the doctors that were operating on you at the weekend.
Sqad
// Experience is there for them at weekends as well as during the week.....experience......experience. //
this is a bit seventies you know - as someone who looks forward to great changes- experience has to be moulded by teaching
and in the seventies as you well know - it was common to do it wrong once and then another 99 times ....
experience and teaching .....
// Experience is there for them at weekends as well as during the week.....experience......experience. //
this is a bit seventies you know - as someone who looks forward to great changes- experience has to be moulded by teaching
and in the seventies as you well know - it was common to do it wrong once and then another 99 times ....
experience and teaching .....
Mikey, //I too, think its a disgrace that doctors are going on strike, and Hunt should be ashamed of himself.//
Nice bit of spin there. ;o)
PeterPedant, //no nigh you have twisted your knickers into a logical knot//
//The term covers those who are fresh out of medical school through to others who have a decade of experience behind them.//
http://
Focus on your own knickers.
Nice bit of spin there. ;o)
PeterPedant, //no nigh you have twisted your knickers into a logical knot//
//The term covers those who are fresh out of medical school through to others who have a decade of experience behind them.//
http://
Focus on your own knickers.
// Jim......I wouldn't trust a research paper that came out of the NHS or any other governmental body. //
a bit of prejudice there I am afraid
almost all the research papers on the NHS are er coming out of the NHS.
funnily enough - govt, NHS - there only remains the private sector and I would be very unwilling to take on face value any paper coming out of a private hospital - ho hum we have our own prejudices
the juniors run the hospitals over the week end
what Hunt is trying to do is introduce seven day operating by juniors wihtou back up and without labs ... and without overtime - oo-er Missus
a bit of prejudice there I am afraid
almost all the research papers on the NHS are er coming out of the NHS.
funnily enough - govt, NHS - there only remains the private sector and I would be very unwilling to take on face value any paper coming out of a private hospital - ho hum we have our own prejudices
the juniors run the hospitals over the week end
what Hunt is trying to do is introduce seven day operating by juniors wihtou back up and without labs ... and without overtime - oo-er Missus
"Jim......I wouldn't trust a research paper that came out of the NHS or any other governmental body. "
Sqad, that's fair enough (although I figure you should at least do the research the justice of reading it first on the off-chance). But the research in question, while carried out by medics some of whom work in NHS trusts or similar, was *not* commissioned by the NHS or government. In that sense it can be regarded as independent, surely?
It's available here, by the way: http://
The key quote, refuting Jeremy Hunt's claim (at least of certainty), is:
"It is not possible to ascertain the extent to which these excess deaths may be preventable; to assume that they are avoidable would be rash and misleading."
Sqad, that's fair enough (although I figure you should at least do the research the justice of reading it first on the off-chance). But the research in question, while carried out by medics some of whom work in NHS trusts or similar, was *not* commissioned by the NHS or government. In that sense it can be regarded as independent, surely?
It's available here, by the way: http://
The key quote, refuting Jeremy Hunt's claim (at least of certainty), is:
"It is not possible to ascertain the extent to which these excess deaths may be preventable; to assume that they are avoidable would be rash and misleading."
Sqad, thank you for your answer at 09:59. That concurs with my understanding of it.
Mushroom, //if i die today as a provable result of the (in)action, who does my family sue? //
The doctors are responsible. It’s utterly shameful that they have left A&E and intensive care units without cover.
Mikey, //What do you think of Sqads views on wimmim doctors ?//
I think sqad has a point, As an employer I would be reluctant to spend money on training young women.
Mushroom, //if i die today as a provable result of the (in)action, who does my family sue? //
The doctors are responsible. It’s utterly shameful that they have left A&E and intensive care units without cover.
Mikey, //What do you think of Sqads views on wimmim doctors ?//
I think sqad has a point, As an employer I would be reluctant to spend money on training young women.
On News last night; 2 junior docs, one against the strike, he, suited and rational and she had come to the studio in her blue smock, obviously to demonstrate she was a serious doctor, innit? Here's the hypocrisy PP; she said she was only striking for the benefit of her patients (if she worked longer hours she would presumably be negligent). What a laugh!
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles31 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles42 mins ago
This Is A Bit Alarming - Rise In Strokes...
News46 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.