Andrew Lansley has agreed to take the Working Time Directive back to Europe. This announcement came in response to a question in Parliament today:-
Dr Sarah Wollaston (Totnes) (Con): One year on from the implementation of the European working time directive, there is evidence that patient care is suffering. Handovers have been inadequate in some cases, and junior doctors’ training time has been reduced. Will my right hon. Friend reassure me that he will take action to allow some acute specialities to opt out of the European working time directive?
Mr Lansley: Yes. I am very clear that, together with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, we need to take the European working time directive back to the European Union. We need to discuss it again. We need to go to the European Union with the intention of maintaining the opt-out and of giving ourselves, not least in the health context, the flexibility that we lack, so that junior doctors, in particular, have the capacity to undertake the training that they need. It is not that we want to go back to the past, when there were excessive hours—100-hour weeks and so on—but we want junior doctors to be confident that they will get the training that they require in the period allocated for training.
|
|
|
After a year of the Working Time Directive it appears that doctors are voting with their feet and starting to abandon ship.
A paper received by Remedy has revealed the number of doctors from Foundation Year who are simply walking out of a career in the NHS. Figures presented to the Medical Programme Board, show that of the 6,000 doctors completing Foundation then a substantial number (around 23%) have simply not applied for a job in Core Training. About 7% of those who did apply, and were successfully appointed, then went on to turn the post down. Their destination is unknown. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
How would you feel if you moved to a new hospital and discovered that their mortality for the cases you were doing was twice the national average? Would you try to get things changed? And if you succeeded then would you expect to be treated as a saint or a sinner?
22 years ago Dr Steve Bolsin found himself in this position when he took up a post in childrens heart surgery. After many years of struggle he got things changed - but at a huge cost to himself. Now it is time for British medicine to acknowledge the contribution of this unsung hero.
Dr Bolsin was appointed as a consultant anaesthetist in September 1988. Almost immediately he realised that there were problems in Bristol with the conduct of open heart surgery in children. He was particularly concerned about the long duration of surgery and bypass, and the consequent effect on postoperative outcomes. He soon raised this with his Professor and his departmental Chairman.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Remedy is delighted to announce a significant change in the GMC's attitude to examinations taken by doctors outside training programmes.
New guidance states that doctors who are already in specialty training or who enter by 31 October 2011 will be able to have any valid passes in previously approved national professional examinations counted towards a CCT, even if they were obtained outside approved training. By the end of October 2010, the GMC will issue guidance on recognition of examinations for doctors who may enter a CCT programme after 31 October 2011.
This is an interim position, and a final position will be reached later in the year, following a further meeting.
The full GMC statement can be read here. |
|
|
Today in the High Court Remedy were defeated in their bid to seek a GMC Fitness to Practice enquiry into the Architects of MTAS. Lord Justice Elias and Justice Keith ruled that the doctors responsible for the "biggest crisis in the medical profession in a generation" were immune from an investigation of misconduct because their conduct was not disreputable or of a kind which justified moral censure. And they ruled that the doctors responsible for this "disaster" were immune from a GMC deficient perfomance investigation because the functions that they were exercising were too remote from the practice of medicine to bring them within the scope of the relevant legislation.
It is now generally recognised that MTAS - the recruitment process for junior doctors introduced in 2007 - was a deeply flawed scheme. A study conducted by the Dean of the Royal College of Psychiatrists of some 790 junior doctors found that they showed an increased risk of suicide and other psychiatric morbidity resulting from stress, and that their loss of morale may well have adversely affected patient care. It was comprehensively examined in a number of public investigations and a judicial review which had concluded "The premature introduction of MTAS has had disastrous consequences".
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
