Letter: GP fundholding based on self-interest
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.GP fundholding based on self-interestSir: Dr P J Ambler (Letters, 15 May) hits the nail on the head. Of course GP fundholders have achieved improvements in services for their own patients, but given that ultimately the size of the financial health cake remains the same, the majority of such gains will necessarily be at the expense of services available to other GPs (no lesser physicians themselves, but likely less astute entrepreneurs), and hence to their patients.
People are ill usually through no fault of their own, and should not be expected to suffer as a result of inequity of provision. If we pride ourselves on having any sort of social conscience we should seek to redress any such imbalance, and not compound it by persisting with self-centred systems based on self-interest.
Dr A Canale-Parola
Rugby, Warwickshire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments