THE PRESS FRIDAY, MAY 6, 1983. Doctors in danger

Press, 6 May 1983, Page 12

THE PRESS FRIDAY, MAY 6, 1983. Doctors in danger

When thieves turned to chemists’ shops some years ago as a source of drugs, most chemists responded by greatly improving the security of their premises. This led, more recently, to armed hold-ups against chemists and their staffs. The response of many chemists has been to reduce their stocks of drugs likely to be sought for illegal use. Only a desperate or foolish thief can expect to get much joy from chemists’ shops now. Doctors are being subjected to the same criminal harassment. Cars and surgeries have been broken into and drugs have been stolen. More recently, some doctors have been threatened and robbed of drugs, sometimes after being called out at night to attend strangers who have claimed to need medical help urgently. In the short run, at least, the best response for those doctors still prepared to respond to calls for help at night from unknown people would be to carry as few drugs as possible, or none at all. District branches of the Medical Association should then make sure that it is well known doctors do not carry stocks of drugs that might be attractive to criminals. Such an arrangement would bring difficulties. Drugs likely to be sought by criminals, and needed by doctors, will still have to be readily available from a secure central store. Reliable escorts would have to take such drugs to where they are needed when called for by a doctor. The escort might have to come from the police. This would be less of a strain on police resources than to take up the suggestion that all doctors on night calls, if they feel suspicious, should seek a police escort

before responding to the call. Some patients may have to wait a little longer before they receive treatment. Special arrangements might be needed outside cities and large towns. Doctors answering calls for help in remote places might not be able to rely on drugs arriving quickly enough. If offenders cannot be prevented from threatening or assaulting doctors going about their work, only two courses seem practicable: the target of the offenders must be removed or it must be protected. The assumption that doctors will be carrying sought-after drugs at times when they are exposed to robberies might be dispelled; alternatively, the doctor, or the drugs, must become protected targets. One possible precaution to be taken by doctors is that they at least check with the police before embarking on suspicious calls. When police and doctors are summoned to emergencies that are clearly likely to require drugs, the police might be enabled to convey appropriate drugs.

One way or another, doctors will have to take greater precautions to secure themselves and their possessions. The community faces a further increase in inconvenience and, at times, an increase in suffering for people who are ill or injured. Already, pain-killing drugs have had to be removed from the first aid kits of light aircraft, rescue craft, and other places where they might be needed quickly after an accident. Although the attacks on doctors are still uncommon, the risk that they may increase is eroding a little further the comfort and convenience of law-abiding people.