Hi, my name is Justinian

[Pipkin]

And I'm not "even going" to read the rest of your post. (And you did go on to point out how "generalising and prejudiced" you think my views are.) Read my post properly and then read several other posts from "prejudiced" people who agree with me, one of whom worked in the NHS for 13 years and another who has similar communication problems with doctors who can't speak English beyond ordering a cup of tea and thanking the waiter and then asking where the tourist information office is. Don't insult me with ignorant accusations, please, and I'll afford you the same courtesy. Oh and please apologise to debs71 and pulisa who you just accused of being prejudiced. I don't need or require an apology.

1) I don't believe I did actually point out why I believe your post to be generalising. I just gave a few points to consider.
2) I didn't call you or anyone else prejudiced. I said your comments were.
3) Not funny. Again generalising around people's level of English. I agree that it's true in some cases and can be a problem but is it necessary to be so deriding to people who have travelled to this country to fill vacancies which would otherwise leave us with little or no service? You can point out the facts as you see them without being rude to people. Have you considered that there are non-English speakers on this forum? Your comments will hardly make them feel welcome.
4) No ignorant accusations from me. Just opinions.
5) I don't recall calling anyone prejudiced. As I have already said, I just pointed out that I consider (and continue to consider) your comments to be generalising and prejudiced.
6) Indeed, I don't owe you an apology. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. As such, you can air your views and I can point out why I don't agree. I don't need or require (tautological) an apology either.

Pip

[MyNameIsTerry]

I was being sarcastic in the second instance that you quoted me. Doctors from other wealthy countries don't want to come here, so the NHS scrapes the bottom of the barrel for the dregs whose primary motivation is a ten-fold pay rise and a ten-fold increase in living standards in a peaceful and safe society. The exception, of course, is the doctor who arrived here because he lost his licence to practice in Germany. He then accidentally gave an elderly patient a lethal dose of diamorphine (aka heroin). He was told not to do that again and was allowed to keep 'practising medicine' here. If that isn't desperation then I don't know what is...

Fair enough, sarcasm doesn't always come across so I didn't see it.

One of the GP's at my surgery is Spanish. So, not all are coming here because they are the exception like the German doctor you mention.

To be honest though, he has a very thick accent and mumbles so he was difficult to understand.

I totally agree on the point made by Debs & pulisa about being able to speak English. It's not racist to ask for the ability to speak the language in a role that includes communication. Only Guardian readers & Corbynistas will jump up & down about that and probably tell us we should learn 50 different languages ourselves to converse with them! SJW's are like that.

You don't have to have English as a first language, just be able to speak it well enough to do the job. Other than that, I want competence in a doctor.

I disagree that other countries and their training are a problem since they can't get licenced, to my knowledge, without ensuring their standard of training matches ours. Have standards slipped? Or more accurately been "relaxed" to allow them to hit their quotas? I don't know.

---------- Post added at 05:08 ---------- Previous post was at 05:02 ----------

They don't do psychosurgery anymore in the UK, probably because it was barbaric and its practitioners were quacks with no idea what they were doing nor any theory even to start with. Psychosurgery just turned patients into potatoes which I suppose is one way of 'curing' mental distress, but then it's a little like curing mental illness by killing the patient. You can cure any illness by killing the patient. You can cure a broken leg by killing the patient. For these reasons, lobotomies/leucotomies never really took off...

Yes, they do.

http://ocduk.org/neurosurgery

There are now only two remaining NMD centres in the UK, Dundee and Cardiff. The University Hospital of Wales in Cardiff and in Dundee the service is based at Ninewells Hospital which has adopted the title of an Advanced Interventions Service (AIS) to emphasise that neurosurgical treatments are only one component of a comprehensive service delivery that also includes medication and specialist psychological therapies.

I remember a new member in Italy talking about having treatment with Gamma Knife. This seems like a new thing:

http://www.nomorepanic.co.uk/showthread.php?t=182747


---------- Post added at 05:14 ---------- Previous post was at 05:08 ----------

Wow that is very dark. Thank you for sharing, you paint quite the picture. You could write a book!
It's actually shocking how often I hear stories about medical things that have little to no backing. Then you have "hollistic" medicines which the NHS use that have high success rates but are never officially researched and as such, remain underfunded and not widely known.

I thought they still did ECT, glad they don't.

HJ,

Yes, they still do ECT and it's recommended as a possible treatment.

https://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/TA59

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Depress...Treatment.aspx

Electric shock treatment

Sometimes electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) may be recommended if you have severe depression and other treatments, including antidepressants, haven't worked.

During ECT, you'll first be given an anaesthetic and medication to relax your muscles. Then you'll receive an electrical "shock" to your brain through electrodes placed on your head.

You may be given a series of ECT sessions. It is usually given twice a week for three to six weeks.

For most people, ECT is good for relieving severe depression, but the beneficial effect tends to wear off after several months.

Some people get unpleasant side effects, including short-term headaches, memory problems, nausea and muscle aches.

Read more information about electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on the Mind website.

http://www.mind.org.uk/information-s.../#.V57LkY-cHIU

Personal experiences

People’s experience of ECT varies enormously. Some people find it the most useful treatment they have had, and would ask for it again if they needed treatment for depression. Others feel violated by it, and would do anything to avoid having it again.

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/healthadvic...being/ect.aspx

One famous example is Beverly Callard.

---------- Post added at 05:17 ---------- Previous post was at 05:14 ----------

No one has thrown the race card out there have they? I don't think anyone had suggested that bad communication between Dr and patient is fine either.
I would imagine the main issue people had was with the language used. Which I think is fair enough, be them left or right.

I think people should be able to say what they like on here be it left or right. But in doing so it's going to attract those who disagree.
Gets the blood pumping. It's probably good for you.

I think it was generalisations and use of language. Regardless, Justinian needs to be aware that this can be perceived a certain way whether he intended it to be or not.

Pip has mentioned about the standards, as have I. Without understanding this and factoring it in, unless it has been, it could be considered ignorance.

I see no issue in discussion but labelling entire countries is where you start to enter dodgy ground.

---------- Post added at 05:24 ---------- Previous post was at 05:17 ----------

Pipkin thinks you are a racist bigot. That helps him sleep at night.

---------- Post added at 22:22 ---------- Previous post was at 22:20 ----------

No hard feelings, Pipkin. I disagree with your arguments, I don't dislike you personally.

No, Pip didn't call pulisa a racist bigot at all - YOU added that to attempt to cause a problem between pulisa & Pip. I would suggest that is a discussion between the two of you without dragging others unwillingly into it.

Pulisa merely made the point that English speaking staff are necessary in an English speaking country.

This isn't confined to the UK though, our doctors work in countries without knowing the language too. They tend to be filling gaps in where they can't get help so must accept it on face value whereas we are recruiting for positions we can afford to be more choosey about when it comes to making demands on the applicants.

---------- Post added at 05:32 ---------- Previous post was at 05:24 ----------

And I'm not "even going" to read the rest of your post. (And you did go on to point out how "generalising and prejudiced" you think my views are.) Read my post properly and then read several other posts from "prejudiced" people who agree with me, one of whom worked in the NHS for 13 years and another who has similar communication problems with doctors who can't speak English beyond ordering a cup of tea and thanking the waiter and then asking where the tourist information office is. Don't insult me with ignorant accusations, please, and I'll afford you the same courtesy. Oh and please apologise to debs71 and pulisa who you just accused of being prejudiced. I don't need or require an apology.

Pip has no need to apologise to Debs & pulisa. They made respectful points about an issue without the need to generalise about whole countries. Their posts in no way mirror yours.

Debs said this:

Let's not talk about race or colour here, but let's just THINK about basic communication issues.

That's quite valid. It doesn't generalise about nations, it raises the issue purely of having the language skills needed for the environment. No mention of comments aimed at the countries they are from and YOU added the part about the cup of tea, the waiter and tourist board to add more effect to your statements.

Why not make your points in a valid & constructive way without resorting to the remarks about peoples countries? That way we can have a debate about it without the possibility of offence being caused.

Like Pip says, this is an international website. We all want to feel included on here.

...and no I'm not on the left, I can't stand the loony left.

[Pipkin]

Pipkin thinks you are a racist bigot. That helps him sleep at night.

---------- Post added at 22:22 ---------- Previous post was at 22:20 ----------

No hard feelings, Pipkin. I disagree with your arguments, I don't dislike you personally.

Tut tut Justin. You know perfectly well that I didn't call anyone racist or a bigot, not least Pulisa whom I have a lot of respect for. If you're looking to cause tension between other members, you're barking up the wrong tree with me.

As I said, you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to respond. Part of my role here is to ensure posts are balanced and that all members are treated fairly and equally. However, posting 'no hard feelings' doesn't allow you to be rude to people.

Pip

[Justinian]

To Terry and Pipkin,

I didn't say Pipkin called debs71 or pulisa "prejudiced" or "bigots", but that he thinks they are.

It seems you are getting all het up by a straw man you built.

So how is it that they make the same points as me, and indeed say that they agree with me, and that only I am a prejudiced bigot?

That takes some warped logic.

Congratulations.

---------- Post added at 20:41 ---------- Previous post was at 20:29 ----------

1) I don't believe I did actually point out why I believe your post to be generalising. I just gave a few points to consider.
2) I didn't call you or anyone else prejudiced. I said your comments were.
3) Not funny. Again generalising around people's level of English. I agree that it's true in some cases and can be a problem but is it necessary to be so deriding to people who have travelled to this country to fill vacancies which would otherwise leave us with little or no service? You can point out the facts as you see them without being rude to people. Have you considered that there are non-English speakers on this forum? Your comments will hardly make them feel welcome.
4) No ignorant accusations from me. Just opinions.
5) I don't recall calling anyone prejudiced. As I have already said, I just pointed out that I consider (and continue to consider) your comments to be generalising and prejudiced.
6) Indeed, I don't owe you an apology. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. As such, you can air your views and I can point out why I don't agree. I don't need or require (tautological) an apology either.

Pip

This is hilarious!

2 -- Does this mean a non-prejudiced person makes prejudiced comments? Is it 1984?

3 -- I'm "generalising", as I've said multiple times here, about the doctors that I have consulted. This is called personal experience.

"people who have travelled to this country to fill vacancies which would otherwise leave us with little or no service"

Ha! People who can't communicate are filling vacancies and endangering patients' lives by being unable to communicate effectively with the patients. Several doctors who have been present during my treatment hampered my treatment and a nurse had to translate or do his job for him while he stood there and watched.

5 -- See point 2

[Pipkin]

For the record, you'll see that I have never called anyone a 'bigot' and, clearly, someone can make prejudiced comments without being prejudiced. The latter is unlikely but I was correcting as a matter of accuracy. Nonetheless, you have certainly reinforced my opinion with your statement about endangering patients' lives. It's doubtless true on occasion, just as the same could be said for inept doctors of any background. However, balance is key to an evidenced-based discussion. Consider 'misleading vividness'.

No, I don't think this it is 'hilarious' and neither do I believe that as I don't agree with you, my logic must be 'warped'. I suggest you consider that there are valid opinions other than your own and that you accept this with a little more maturity. As I've consistently said, you are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to disagree.

Enough said. I'm clearly wasting my time trying to make my point and you're obviously enjoying the discussion more than I am. I prefer discussions of mutual respect, even when two parties disagree.

Pip

[MyNameIsTerry]

I don't recall calling you a prejudiced bigot, Justinian. Again, only you are adding that. I think you can make your point without certain comments that generalise other nations. Personal experience seldom translates to everything and it just cheapens valid points which were later discussed.

[Justinian]

For the record, you'll see that I have never called anyone a 'bigot' and, clearly, someone can make prejudiced comments without being prejudiced. The latter is unlikely but I was correcting as a matter of accuracy. Nonetheless, you have certainly reinforced my opinion with your statement about endangering patients' lives. It's doubtless true on occasion, just as the same could be said for inept doctors of any background. However, balance is key to an evidenced-based discussion. Consider 'misleading vividness'.

You a David Brent fan? Gervais's famous creation was a p**s-take about people like you. Haha! Btw, I didn't read the rest of your post. :-)

[Pipkin]

You a David Brent fan? Gervais's famous creation was a p**s-take about people like you. Haha! Btw, I didn't read the rest of your post. :-)

Thanks for the confirmation of my opinion that you lack respect and maturity. I knew I was a good judge of character.

Pip

[Justinian]

Thanks for the confirmation of my opinion that you lack respect and maturity. I knew I was a good judge of character.

Pip

"Never judge a man till you have walked a mile in his shoes"

-- Dolly Parton

[Pipkin]

"Never judge a man till you have walked a mile in his shoes"

-- Dolly Parton

Ditto.

And again, thanks for the confirmation of my opinion that you lack respect and maturity. I knew I was a good judge of character.

Pip