As sort of follow-up to my earlier post, Pulse magazine, this morning, says:-
“Making GPs work longer and pay more for their pensions is one step too far from the health secretary.”
That is, making them work until 65, instead of 60. Hmm . . .
(I’ll ignore the fact that it should be “…by the health secretary.”)
It does rather make me wonder – and I know that Pulse is a magazine aimed at GPs, not patients – why none of Lansley’s measures aimed at fucking with the lives of patients has attracted the slightest ire.
Or could it be – and I ask this in all seriousness – that the patients don’t matter a hell of a lot? That we’re just a source of income?
Now I do know some GPs will be mortified by that suggestion, and justifiably so – but I also know some who appear to regard patients as a necessary bloody nuisance, to be endured.
Whatever the truth of the matter, it might be nice to see a little thought given to our plight occasionally. Don’t you think?
But – you’ll love this – a Pulse contributor who writes under the name of Copperfield, and has an extremely jaundiced view of patients, is waxing wroth at his PCT’s restrictions on hospital referrals.
Not because it’s bad news for his patients, though it is, but because he resents the implication that he might refer people unnecessarily.
Priorities, eh? Don’tcha just love ’em?