A powerful, important read from @deb_cohen http://www.bmj.com/content/359/bmj.j5534 … its hard not to think the @gmcuk and the courts have got this very seriously wrong...
-
-
Nail. Head. Making it publicly funded might at least resolve some of the distrust/dissatisfaction.
-
Good start, I agree. Doesn't matter how many times you say it, paid for by doctors, run by doctors, judging other doctors... never sounds any better. I'm sure many will dispute & defend it, but that's the external perception. And then a few poor sods get nailed to hit stats.
-
Exactly. Public don’t trust it. Doctors don’t either. And doctors resent having to pay for something they see as being “out to get them”.
-
Sounds a lot like the atmosphere in every regulated environment I've ever encountered tbh. Resentment is almost a natural inevitability, but especially so when regulatory credibility is lacking.
-
Is self-funded regulation common? I genuinely don’t know if it is “the norm” or unusual.
-
I'm a bit out of the loop now, but self regulation has been common for a while. As has regulatory capture, it seems. I think most models are more indirectly funded through industry, rather than direct contribution like docs. You're all too easy to track, (& blackmail for fees).
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.