Skip to main content

Why the new junior doctor contract is bad for academic medicine and the UK's economy

As a clinician and academic, I was deeply saddened to see the Secretary of State for Health impose a new contract on junior doctors. The 55,000 junior doctors in England’s NHS are perhaps the most intelligent and highly educated and trained professional group in the country. They are perfectly capable of looking at the contractual changes being put forward by the NHS and drawing their own conclusions about the implications of the new contract for them. To say that they have been ‘brainwashed’ by extremist members of the British Medical Association, as some journalists and Conservative MPs have been implying, is ludicrous.

We also continue to hear from the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, that he believes that these contractual changes are needed to tackle higher weekend mortality in hospitals. This is an area in which I have and members of my department have published extensively. I am therefore fully aware of the research on this topic and the serious problems with some of the statements issued by Jeremy Hunt and the Department of Health (for example, see http://goo.gl/CEab0N). The UK Statistics Authority has written to the Department of Health about this matter but this letter does not seem to have had any effect on Jeremy Hunt or his officials.

Through my clinical and academic work, I am in regular contact with many junior doctors. They are becoming increasingly disillusioned and anxious about their future. Many are considering leaving the NHS to work overseas in countries such as Australia, New Zealand or Canada. Others are considering giving up their medical careers. The UK cannot afford to lose such highly trained professionals. As well as being essential for the NHS and the delivery of healthcare in England, junior doctors are also the clinical academics and medical scientists of the future. Healthcare-related industries such as pharmaceuticals are one of the few areas where the UK is still a world-leader. The future prosperity of these industries - and the economy of the UK - will be threatened by the loss of so many highly talented professionals.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...
Post a Comment
Read more

Relevance Over Recall: Rethinking How AI Uses Clinical Data

Our article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine argues that safe and effective AI in healthcare must incorporate mechanisms that emulate human judgement - down-weighting old, inaccurate or superseded information and prioritising what is recent, clinically relevant and reaffirmed - so that AI supports, rather than disrupts, high-quality patient care.  Clinicians constantly revise, reinterpret and filter past information so that only what is relevant, accurate and timely shapes present-day management decisions; medical records function as dynamic “working tools” rather than fixed archives. By contrast, many AI systems lack this capacity for selective forgetting and often treat all historical data as equally meaningful.  This can lead to outdated or low-confidence diagnoses being repeatedly resurfaced, persistent labels influencing clinical expectations, and irrelevant, long-resolved events cluttering summaries and decision-support outputs. Such indiscriminate recall...
Post a Comment
Read more