I kept hoping that this was a terrible mistake, and that the story would be retracted. Alas, it seems to be be all too real, and an insult to the Hippocratic Oath.
From the Telegraph (UK)
An elderly woman was ordered to find a new GP because the “carbon footprint” of her two-mile round trips to the surgery where she had been treated for 30 years was too large.
Avril Mulcahy, 83, was told to address the “green travelling issues” over her journeys from her home in Westcliff-on-Sea, Essex, to the West Road Surgery.
The letter said: “Our greatest concern is for your health and convenience but also taking into consideration green travelling issues. Re: Carbon footprints and winter weather conditions, we feel it would be advisable for patients to register at surgeries nearer to where they live. We would be very grateful if you could make the necessary arrangements to re-register at another practice.”
…
“To be treated like this, just because I live too far away or for what I feel is a reaction to my complaint, is disgraceful. It feels like they are just coming up with an excuse to get rid of me.”
Given the treatment I have experienced for my views, I wouldnot be at all surprised if this grows. As Andrew Bolt says: “They really are mad you know…“
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Perhaps a rewrite of the GP’s letter is in order:
“Dear Avril
You’re cracking on a bit you know, 83 according to our records and you recently made a complaint.
You are just not the sort of person that we want to encourage as patients. We prefer young, healthy people that don’t bother us with their problems and, because we never see them they don’t make complaints.
Best of luck finding another practice, we’ll be removing you from our list.
Yours sincerely”
In the UK GP Practices have a limited budget and therefore tend to prefer young and healthy people who subsidise the cost of care for their elderly patients, children and chronically or terminally ill patients.
According to the National Health Service a patient has “the right to choose a GP practice and to be accepted by that practice unless there are reasonable grounds to refuse you, such as living outside the practice boundary. Normally, the practice should inform you of those reasons.”
The worst GP’s can be high handed and often wish to get rid of patients who make complaints about them or their practice. If Avril Mulcahy lives within the boundary of the Practice then she has a right to be a patient at West Road Surgery.
GP’s do make home visits during the day but many are lazy and don’t like travelling too far from their surgeries which they have to do more frequently for the elderly. Nor do they like coordinating and paying for ancillary services out of their limited budgets, which cost more for the elderly.
A recent report into social care for the UK government by Professor Andrew Dilnot, in effect stated that GP’s should support elderly patients better.
Mrs Mulcahy’s travel arrangements and carbon footprint are, of course, spurious reasons for her doctor to give to expel her from the Practice. But who would want to be treated by a doctor who behaved in this way?
Ian E says:
It would be interesting to know how many patients live more than a mile (2-mile round-trip) from their GPs. Rather a lot I would have thought! [I’m OK, though (sick!), I’m in walking distance.]
Depending on how sick you are “walking distance” may be rather more than a mile.
I wonder if this woman’s current surgery is actually the closest one to where she lives…
@ur momisugly Jessie “I had known the icon as belonging to Hermes, God of Cunning & Commerce, not medicine. ”
Yes, and in fact, one of the services which Hermes was occasionally called upon to perform was that of escorting the newly dead to the underworld.
This story didn’t break on the morning of 1st April, by any chance..?
Just checkin’….
A read of the Telegraph on a regular basis yields a horror story or two a week about the NHS. This one is no different.
“taking into consideration green travelling issues…”
Only in Britain. Luckily they have a doctor every square mile so she’ll be fine.
I’ve been reading horror stories about the British system of socialist medicine since it’s inception.
If Obamacare survives the courts and the elections, then for US citizens, this is a story “coming soon to a clinic near you.”
“Our greatest concern is for your health and convenience ”
obviously not.
Her carbon footprint was causing the world to globally warm. She is responsible for the global warming epidemic. Now the world will cool because of this decision. Hooray for them that they can out-do copenhagen and the IPCC in a single decision.
However, I travel well over two miles every day. Thus the world will continue to warm afterall.
This is such a dilemma
of course, doctors in the uk do well over 2 miles every day in cars…
get the ambulances off the roads! They are causing the world to burn!
We have made a terrible mistake. We thought green was life, spring, a beginning. We were wrong. Green is decay, mold, putrefaction.
If Obama’s recent posturing is any indication he already either knows the vote results from last Friday and it went against him or in the alternative he is stoking the fires to get the Supreme Courts shackled.
He really should be careful as he might find himself with unintended consequences.
We (the patients) are supposed to have greater choice in healthcare provision so if she wants to have a doctor on the moon that should be alright. And don’t get me started about private medicine in the UK. As soon as something goes wrong in the private sector, the National Health Service has to jump into action because it has the economy of scale to possess the expensive kit and specialist resources that the private clinics don’t. I thought we didn’t like cherry picking on this site.
Disko Troop says:
April 6, 2012 at 1:05 am
“… the new CFC free [inhalers] are about as effective as a cat’s fart.”
The mental imagery of a cat being used in such a manner is a bit disturbing.
…but I think something similar was represented on South Park.
Terrible for the patient, but in the end it’s best to have had the supporters of the pogrom identify themselves.
My guess is that the lady is right, and the ‘carbon footprint’ remark was an attempt to put a positive gloss (as they see it) on getting rid of her. Could be she’s a chronic complainer, or rude to the staff, or non-compliant with treatment, or something. Believe it or not, there are times when local practices here in the States have to discharge patients for one reason or another, and I assume that is also true in the UK.
/Mr Lynn
I’m sure the real reason they suggested she go elsewhere had nothing to do with carbon footprint or anything. Lots of daft things happen in the UK, but this doctor’s surgery isn’t that daft.
Not so “Great Britain” has fallen off the logic train. No other description needed.
mfo…..But who would want to be treated by a doctor who behaved in this way?
That was exactly the first thought that struck me…. who on earth would want to be treated by somebody with such a sick mind?
Dodgy Geezer says:
April 6, 2012 at 1:31 am
“Umm…. What happened to WUWT scepticism and the spirit of enquiry? The newspaper report says:
“Our greatest concern is for your health and convenience but also taking into consideration green travelling issues. Re: Carbon footprints and winter weather conditions, we feel it would be advisable for patients to register at surgeries nearer to where they live. We would be very grateful if you could make the necessary arrangements to re-register at another practice.”
That doesn’t read as if ‘green’ issues are to the fore.”
Following your recommendation I did read it and I find that it says “but also taking into consideration green travelling issues. Re: Carbon footprints and “. Just like when I read it the first time.
Maybe you missed that. Anyway, of course it’s a pretense to get rid of that patient, but a decidedly green pretense. Where is the outcry of the greens about this malicious abuse of their religion? The green BBC reports nothing.
This is what happens when you look to the government to solve “problems.” They are never solved, and the problems grow exponentially. FDR did not end the Great Depression (Recession to our friends on the other side of the pond), he prolonged it. The Great Society did not end poverty, it merely made generations dependent on the federal government. Medicare did not control medical costs, it helped inflate them. The War on Drugs has done nothing to deal with drug use issues, just made it more violent. And last, but not least, the whole AGW nonsense. Big government, bigger problems.
The patient is over 80 years old and the general practice has a contractual duty to visit on request.
Retired Physician
More likely this highlights the fact that some General Practitioner can’t handle a complaint from some poor 83 year old patient without throwing their doll out of the pushchair ……..now what excuse shall I make to strike my complaining patient off the list?…… Oh yes the evil CO2….. that sounds plausible.
At least they can offset the patients ‘carbon footprint’ against the Doctors journeys to the golf course.
As the lady says, she knows its nothing to do with her carbon footprint, but just an insincere invocation of a supposed argument stopper. It used to be Health & Safety that would have been the universal pretence for shutting down any discussion. It probably still is but is no longer alone.
I susggest the good lady goes back to the surgery, and seeks treatment for her carbon foot.
The beauty of the progressive welfare state. When the government gives you “free” health care, education, retirement, etc…Guess what? You’re now a liability.