INCOMES OF N.Z. DOCTORS

Southland Times, Issue 25538, 5 December 1944, Page 4

INCOMES OF N.Z. DOCTORS

MEDICAL JOURNAL’S COMMENT (Rec. 7.30 p.m.) LONDON, Dec. 3. An article in The Lancet states that some general medical practitioners in New Zealand are alleged to be making £lO,OOO a year. “The fee for service is one of five methods of paying doctors under New Zealand’s free medical services for the whole population, but the disadvantage of the system is that it is open to abuse,” says the journal. “It is comparatively easy for a moderately competent doctor, by over-attendance on patients, to earn £3OOO to £4OOO a year. The more efficient, by dint of organization, can, it is alleged, reach £lO,OOO. ’ The article concludes: “New Zealand will some day have to find a solution for problems which we have failed to solve here—how to reward the able and conscientious doctor who may make fewer but more useful attendances than his less efficient and less scrupulous colleagues.” AUCKLAND DOCTOR’S COMMENT HIGHER EARNINGS THAN BEFORE WAR (Special) AUCKLAND, Dec. 4. Comment on the references to New Zealand’s medical, service, which appeared in The Lancet, has been made by the president of the Auckland branch of the British Medical Association, Dr J. McMurray Cole. Regarding the alleged incomes of £lO,OOO a year, said Dr Cole, all he knew about them, was that they had been mentioned in Parliament as having been earned by three doctors. It was true that doctors were earning more now than before the war, but to what extent this was due to the social security scheme, or to the absence of many doctors on service overseas, it was difficult to say. It would not be fair to say the increase in earnings was entirely due to the scheme. SCHEME NOT FAVOURED “On the face of it, the doctors are doing better on the existing scheme than they would do on the one favoured by them,” he continued. “However, the majority do not like it, because it is open to abuse, and for the reason that anything completely free is not appreciated. They would prefer a system by which a patient would pay some small fee, which would tend to check unnecessary visitation and yet not put up a barrier against any person needing attention. “The crux of the problem is that doctors cannot give as good service as they would if there were not such a great pressure of work. They can certainly get a good living, financially, but they cannot get a comfortable one. It is difficult to evolve a scheme to check unnecessary demands on a doctor’s services and yet not prevent a patient from getting help.” Dr Cole said the same applied to medicines, for which there was an increasing demand. It was thought that much of this was unnecessary. A small charge of, say, 6d a bottle might tend to reduce the rush and enable people to get proper attention.