Brexit: bad for doctors, worse for patients, but there is hope

The medical profession has always been staunchly opposed to Brexit. Even before the 2016 referendum the British Medical Journal predicted dire consequences, and whilst the pro-European tone was slightly subdued in the immediate aftermath, criticism has become more vehement as the process dragged on.

Last week the BMJ reported on a meeting of 150 doctors in Belfast who found “little to feel positive about”, not least the bizarre prospect of emergency ambulances being stopped when they crossed a hard border. A leading article (pictured) considered the plight of EU-qualified doctors who comprise almost 10% of our medical workforce, but longer feel so welcome here, with some 40% thinking of leaving. For nurses the figure is even worse: 90% of those who would have come, have now thought better of it.

Needless to say these nurses and healthcare workers are not the destitute scroungers of our newspapers, intent on sponging off our benefits system. These are good people, from civilised countries, who contribute infinitely more than they take from us. Of course nobody in reality objects to Spanish physiotherapists or Polish radiographers any more than Italian waiters, but it was the skill of the Leave campaign to conflate freedom of movement with unwanted immigration. They stoked primitive fears of our beloved country being invaded by hoards of unwanted aliens and whether they came from Europe, Asia, Africa or Mars, it was all the fault of the EU. Now we are reaping what we sowed.

Freedom of movement is also vital for research collaboration, as I know from my own experience. The joint effort to tackle the problems posed by disease makes national boundaries irrelevant, and the UK was always a leader here, before Brexit began to cast its baleful shadow.

In other respects medical ideas have proved quite valuable in the Brexit debate. Dr Sarah Wollaston MP usefully applied the concept of “informed consent” – before you are wheeled into the operating theatre for a major operation, the doctor checks with you, that you understand the risks versus the benefits. That’s good medicine, and Wollaston’s “doctors amendment” in favour of a final check on whether we want Brexit, is hard to fault.

But Theresa May’s concept of medicine is very different. Faced with a patient who has harmed themselves, she would say “I know you were in two minds about it, and half of you wanted to live and half of you didn’t. But the fact is, you decided to self harm and that must be respected. Can’t I change my mind, says the patient, won’t you give me the antidote? No, says Dr May, stony faced. “You expressed the will to die, and I will deliver on that”.

But is Theresa May really callous enough to inflict a no-deal scenario on the nation, knowing that supply of medicines would be jeopardised and people’s lives would be put at risk? Quite possibly unfortunately, as she seems to have become ever more ruthless and intransigent as the crisis has deepened. This is why our MPs will need to assert themselves as they have never done before, to ride to the rescue and seize back control from her.

To end on a positive note, the march on Saturday, which I attended, was filled with genuine passion and spontaneity, in stark contrast with May’s robotic and mechanical manner. Fundamentally, medicine is about caring, and that huge but peaceful march showed there is plenty of caring left in Britain, both caring for each other and caring about the country.

* John King is a retired doctor and Remain campaigner.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

6 Comments

  • The NHS only relies on foreign staff so much because of a deliberate decision by successive UK governments to not train our own people. Poaching trained staff from other countries is the cheap & short-sighted option.

  • Lorenzo Cherin 25th Mar '19 - 1:21pm

    Every aspect true, every one overdone.

    The fact is that for the extra doctors we have from abroad, we need them too, because since the accession of many new countries we have much in the way of demand, a far greater population than ever, needs far more services.

    Also as the comment here says, we as a country thought it cheaper to not train but import skills.

    We as a country could get real on tax and spend, target the huge tax dodgers of the international corporations, and invest in this country.

    We must have as before the EU, the right to import skills. As well as that we must return to the investment in them here too.

  • Richard Underhill 26th Mar '19 - 9:31am

    Mark Seaman 25th Mar ’19 – 12:31pm
    Where do you live? England? Scotland? Wales? Northern Ireland? or elsewhere?
    This issue is affected by devolution.

  • Yet another article that by its omission says that LibDem policy is to promote continued dependency on imported workers rather than investing in those already living here; as Mark Seaman observed many of the problems in the NHS are due to successive governments failing to heed the forecasts and invest in people.

    If you go back to the referendum and what people were really complaining about, it was really about an ‘overlooked’ status brought about by a system that seemingly favoured immigrants… It isn’t really relevant if it did or didn’t, as the Brexit debate has shown perceptions are important. I thus suggest if the LibDems are to improve their standing they need to have headline policies that appeal to long-term UK residents, which given some of the policies LibDems have, shouldn’t be too much to ask, just a change of focus and emphasis here and there.

  • Mark “The NHS only relies on foreign staff so much because of a deliberate decision by successive UK governments to not train our own people. Poaching trained staff from other countries is the cheap & short-sighted option.” Completely true. And this Brexit government has just axed a University Technical College in my town (after construction of the building) which would have started 16-18 year olds on routes to working in the NHS in the Midlands. Our Tory MP has praised turning the building into a sixth form college. Does not look good for the future.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarMick Taylor 23rd Apr - 3:52pm
    It is always good to read informed articles. Too bad that so few in the modern Lib Dems understand anything about our Liberal/Whig history and...
  • User AvatarBernard Aris 23rd Apr - 3:42pm
    Wow. Praise by the indomitable Liberal veteran activist *) whose column on the back of LibDem Weekly I always read first since the early 1990's;...
  • User AvatarMartin Land 23rd Apr - 3:32pm
    There is no doubt that ECOWAS has been a positive force change in West Africa. An economic group that has evolved into a more political...
  • User AvatarRichard Underhill 23rd Apr - 3:09pm
    The BBC is having difficulty changing the name of a TV programme from The Daily Politics to Politics Live, as evidenced when they move the...
  • User AvatarJohn Marriott 23rd Apr - 2:48pm
    He’s a Dutch historian, Milord. Pretty flat then?
  • User AvatarTony Greaves 23rd Apr - 2:29pm
    What a crying shame there is today no modern equivalent of the 1960s Young Liberals to be playing a leading role in the climate and...