My ozzy wife and I live in the UK and visit Australia every 1 year or so. I am a UK trained GP, with 15 years experience as a GP and GP trainer, with 13 years experience of managing clinical governance, and am a GP appraiser to boot.

It often comes as a suprise to our Australian friends that we are unable to come back to Australia unless I work in an "area of need" for at least 5 years (this applies to both permanent residents and Australian Citizens).

However, I am in my 40s and , with a very successful career in the UK, would not wish to be take part in this scheme which , by definition , requires doctors to go to areas where no other doctor wants to work - the scheme might be suitable for doctors starting their career or wishing to obtain permanent residency.

I really just wanted to highlight how the system works - clearly, Im not moving to Australia until I finish my UK career - and am therefore at least one example of how the current regulations do in fact reduce the number of high quality doctors coming to Australia.

Finally, isn't it a little injust? - I mean my wife's an ozzy, and she can't return home until I've retired.

So, I propse a change the regulations to allow Australian CITIZENS (as compared to permanent residents) of NZ, Canadian or UK origin to work on an equal footing to Australian citizens who trained in Australia. After all, UK GP training is widely regarded as the best in the world - just look at the new GP training curriculum on www.rcgp.org.uk and it speaks for itself and training takes at least 10 years.

PS even if the system was changed, Id still have to chose between Australian general practice and UK general practice - frankly, the UK system is overall better for patients and doctors but that's a different story! The issue here is one of fairness to Australian spouses of UK trained doctors.

Richard

Dear Richard,

I don't doubt your excellent qualifications
for a moment. However if the rules were changed
for UK, Canadian, American, or New Zealand GP's
who happened to be married to Australians - the
Medical Association could be accused of discrimination.

And, this is the reason, I assume that "one size fits
all" applies to doctors with overseas credentials.
It's also to protect us from ones practising - whose
credentials are perhaps not as impeccable as yours.

I'm curious though, are Australian GP's who happen
to be married to a British subject - allowed to practice freely
in the UK - with no strings attached?

I very firmly say it is unfair, we exploit workers bringing them to Australia using 457 visas.
That more often than not means for one job less pay than our own then send them home.
Because we are short of workers in some industry's some areas.
We are short of Doctors too poor planning not enough training and remote overworked Doctors leaving.
However not all our country towns have wallaby's in the main street, some are quite good places to live.
While no way my area is remote 240klm from Sydney we are very very short of Doctors.
So this apparent black mail is unfair , a side issue is some, just a handful , of imported Doctors have been dreadful failures, proof those controlling health are not in control.
However we are being unfair in imposeing such rules.

I totally sympathise with your dilemma.
I live in a country town 200 kms east of Melbourne and while we are not short of doctors clinics we are short of doctors. Now out of hospital, I have a ten days wait to see my GP.
I suggest you contact Dr David Monash on 61351430055 at Mason House Clinic. He is the Senior GP in our area and he might be able to pull strings.

Thankyou for all the comments and I apologise for the delay in replying but have just returned from hols in Canada.

The question "I'm curious though, are Australian GP's who happen
to be married to a British subject - allowed to practice freely
in the UK - with no strings attached?" is that Australian GPs married to a British subject, living in the UK, would be immediately eligible for permanent residency (and then citizenship after 3 years) - so they would then be able to practice freely once the qualifications had been assessed (nb. UK training is now 5 years after primary qualification, whereas australian training is 4 years , so equivalence is unlikely without further training). Permanent resident doctors with an equivalent qualification are able to work freely in the UK.

Having said that, I believe that family ties (= citizenship) should be separated from residency status, and the australian regulations (section 19AB of the health insurance act 1996) treat both permanent residents and citizens equally (if trained abroad, then these doctors are subject to that act, requiring a minimum of 5 years of work in an area of need).

I also agree that there are a lot of positives about working in a rural area - however, such a decision should be made by the individuals involved rather than using coercion.

Thankyou for all the comments and I apologise for the delay in replying but have just returned from hols in Canada.

The question "I'm curious though, are Australian GP's who happen
to be married to a British subject - allowed to practice freely
in the UK - with no strings attached?" is that Australian GPs married to a British subject, living in the UK, would be immediately eligible for permanent residency (and then citizenship after 3 years) - so they would then be able to practice freely once the qualifications had been assessed (nb. UK training is now 5 years after primary qualification, whereas australina training is 4 years , so equivalence is unlikely without further training). Permanent resident doctors with an equivalent qualification are able to work freely in the UK. The UK does not treat the "place of training" differently.

Having said that, I believe that family ties (= citizenship) should be separated from residency status, and the australian regulations (section 19AB of the health insurance act 1996) treat both permanent residents and citizens equally (if trained abroad, then these doctors are subject to that act, requiring a minimum of 5 years of work in an area of need).

I also agree that there are a lot of positives about working in a rural area - however, such a decision should be made by the individuals involved rather than using coercion.