Doctors’ fees

Press, 12 April 1984, Page 20

Doctors’ fees

Sir, — Considering your editorial of today (April 11), I was most surprised by your main headline on the front page which demonstrates thinking along the same lines as the Prime Minister. The G.M.S. is not a doctors’ benefit but has been worked for by successive chairmen of the council of the New Zealand Medical Association on behalf of our patients, especially those who find increasing fees difficult to meet. These efforts have all been frustrated, but at least they should be recognised by the media for what they are. “Doctors’ G.M.S. rise” is misleading, if not mischievous. — Yours, etc.,

J. R. M. DAVIDSON, President, Canterbury Division N.Z.M.A. April 11, 1984.

Sir, — I endorse D. N. Bainbridge’s remarks on the medical profession. Why are doctors a special target? There may be some who deserve it, but what of other professions, such as lawyers, accountants, dentists, eye specialists, chiropractors, and politicians who have more than one source of revenue. Some have three. If some politicians were to relinquish part of their salaries as a good-will gesture, they would certainly set a precedent. One would assume they could afford to do so, their overhead and general outlay would definitely not be as great as that of a general practitioner, for instance. One could go on indefinitely tabulating different types of businesses who charge excessively. There seems to be no hard and fast rule for many. One I cannot fathom is a garage where one can never be sure if items mentioned on an invoice are always done. — Yours, etc., G. PATRICK. April 8, 1984.