Sul,—Under this pathetic heading your correspondent, " Senex," voices the
unsubstantiated opinion that " there seem to be many medical men today, especially in country districts, who resent patients on their panel whom they consider quite well enough off to pay them a good fee." How " Senex " arrived at the unspecified " many " is difficult to understand, unless he has visited many doctors in order to test their reactions. If this is so it would seem to have been either a hypochon- driacal or snooping pilgrimage, prompted less by suffering than by a gnawing grievance. Moreover, if " Senex" is on the panel of one N.H.I. practitioner—being the total number of doctors allowed to an N.H.I. patient—he could only have visited the others as a"private patient; in which case the test was hardly reliable.
Your plaintive correspondent continues to state that, if the doctor " is to show any interest in the case, a fee will be expected over and above whatever the patient may have contributed to N.H.I." Since, as every doctor knows, it is a ,serious breach of regulations which may incur a heavy penalty, to demand fees from a N.H.I. patient, by what means does the doctor let it be " plainly seen " that he expects pay- ment ? - Does he, perhaps, rattle the loose change in bis trousers pocket, or does he expound, between diagnosis and prognosis, upon the high cost of living ? Possibly to be less subtle, and not miss an oppor- tunity to obtain his illicit fee, he places a collecting box in his consult- ing-room labelled, " For Better Treatment Drop Coins in Aperture." Even more likely, as this unpardonable materialism is manifest " especially in country districts," the grasping practioner refuses to leave the bedside until presented with a guinea's worth of butter or ham. " Senex " despairingly admits that " it is difficult to see 'how this
deplorable state of things is to be overcome." Let him take heart. If it can be shown that a doctor has asked a fee of an N.H.I. patient the simple remedy is to report the offence (not anonymously) to the local Executive Council. The complaint being proved, the culprit will be suitably penalised. Thus, should " Senex " be able to produce sufficient evidence of his accusations, he, with the rest of the victimised public,- will quickly be vindicated, and the " black sheep " deservedly " shown up for what they really are." If that much evidence is not available, it is unfortunate that " Senex " should have written a letter so condemning an overworked, self-sacrificing profession, even though " the writer," with commendable magnaminity, " is not suggesting that doctors are more mercenary than men in other professions."
It is time, Sir, for the public to realise that it is not being exploited by doctors and dentists reaping huge rewards from a State cornucopia; that such injustices as may exist under N.H.I. are suffered by the pro- fessions and patients alike. Furthermore, while there are unfortunate and much publicised instances of medical and dental delinquency, the first mad rush of the public to grab free dentures, wigs, aspirins, barley- sugar (medicinal) and anything else available, served, to use the words of " Senex," to " show them up for what they really are."—Faith-
fully yours, EDWARD SAMSON. Aldington, 7 Poole Road, Bournemouth.
Previous page
