Doctors unhappy with fundholding
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Less than one-third of family doctors believe in the principle of GP fundholding, according to a survey published yesterday. And even among those who are already managing their own budgets, support for the principle runs at less than half.
The system has been condemned by some doctors as promoting a two-tier system whereby the patients of fundholding GPs may obtain treatment earlier than those with traditional surgeries. Eighty-five per cent of those questioned thought there should be only one system of financing for all GPs and four out of five thought the money spent on administration could be better used. Paul Evans, of the NHS Support Federation, which commissioned the survey, said: "Most GPs want one system that treats each patient fairly and doesn't waste public money on bureaucracy. Given a free choice, GPs would not choose fundholding."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments