Perhaps the author is finding that GP's are taking business from him, and doing it a lot cheaper and more effectively.

We don't hear GP's complaining about the symptoms or types of illness their patients present with. The first port of call for anyone from what Dr. Ahmed calls the 'worried well' is their family GP. If he cannot handle the problem, the patient is referred to a MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE psychiatrist.

Fortuately, the modern GP is better educated than he or she used to be and actually knows his or her patient; and more often than not, can alleviate the need for the patient to get tangled up in drawn out sessions with a psychiatrist at huge expense to the health system.

We need more, accessable GPs who actually know their local community and their patients. Money should go to them so that people can afford to consult them and take the load of public hospitals.

It will be interesting to see what some GP's say about this article.

Dr Ahmed fails to take into account why many people see their General Practitioner. Their Boss. As an example, I have a bad cold. Couldn't be bothered going to work - feeling too sick. I know I need bed rest, fluids, staying warm, the odd cold/flu tablet. I also know that there is absolutely nothing the doctor can do for me.

So why do I see the doctor? - the certificate that my boss wants to confirm I am sick, and the only place I can get this is my doctor - who has to see me on the day that I am sick in order to issue the certificate.

I would say that the inherent distrust of employees by employers is more to blame for GP overuse by the community.

I believe that what Dr Ahmed is saying is a good opening to support the introduction of more practise nurses, cousellors and social workers attached to the clinic in which the Dr works or if he works independently from a clinic then there should be provision for the Dr to refer his patients on to the appropriate person, ie. cousellor, social worker or practise nurse. The patient would then be managed at this level at a lower cost than that of psychiatrist or psychologist. Of course the concept would have to be endorsed by Medicare in order for the other practitioners to have a provider number and be able to bulk bill the disadvantaged groups.
Rosemary (retired through my own ill health, Registered Nurse).

When Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) were introduced in the US the proposition to the general public was similar to the Aus health system. The public pays a set monthly fee (either individually or through employer benefit programs) and the HMO will take care of whatever happens to you. In the case of Aus we pay a tax - in the US HMO membership is similar to medical insurance.

Early on the HMOs determined that when a "free" service is being offered people will flock in with minor sniffles and non-specific aches and pains. The solution was to put a minimal fee on every office visit (in the cases I am familiar with it was around $5). This substantially reduced the non essential visits and cleared the waiting rooms for the people that had a problem that required medical services.

The US HMO industry has many similarities to the way medical services are delivered in Aus. Since many of the HMOs are for-profit enterprises they have incentives to deliver the best possible care to their customers for the lowest possible costs. I would suspect that there are many service delivery and management techniques that have been developed in the US that would pertain to our system and improve our services without necessarily increasing costs.

"The largest-ever health financing survey by the American think tank, the RAND Corporation, put thousands of patients on different co-payment and compared their usage of health services with their health outcomes over a number of years. It showed that when patients have to pay a reasonable slice of the health care cost, they buy fewer services."
Brilliant !! A stunning result from the most expensive health financing study ever.. What in hell did they expect?.

Snooty_56's idea is far better. Rather than forcing the general populace to fork out bigger bucks, screen the malingerers with qualified nurses, to hand out the sickies to Narcissist and the like, and let the Docs get on with those who need them.

Maybe Dr Ahmed , it would be cheaper to euthanise all those pesky little old ladies.
Twenty dollars to see a GP is fine if you are on a larger income than some pensioners. It is not so long ago that all GP's bulkbilled and medicine was free , then came multiculture and up went all the costs as the population swelled.
I know of nobody who ,these days, visits a doctor unnecessarily, most cannot afford it.
Cheaper to put people down.