Letters
GPs do not have a monopoly on supporting the bereaved
EDITOR,--J N Rawlinson raises several important points about a neighbour's death.1 They are particularly important because of the increasing number of deputising services and the increasing expectations of patients. What concerns me most, however, is Rawlinson's implication that it is a general practitioner's role to stay with a bereaved person in all cases of sudden death. There may well be occasions when this is appropriate, but what of the role of the family, neighbours, and the church? The doctor on duty probably had a considerable number of calls to make after he had dealt with this patient.
It is becoming increasingly difficult to provide a high quality service at the same time as a high quantity service. Unless some central action is taken to reduce inappropriate demands for out of hours care, those for whom such care is appropriate, such as Rawlinson's neighbour, may not always receive the service they
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
Relevant Article
- Adjusting for underenumeration in the 1991 census
- Morven Leese, Linda Loftus, and Graham Thornicroft
BMJ 1995 311: 394.[Extract] [Full Text]
This Article
- Full text
- Respond to this article
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me when responses are posted
- Alert me when a correction is posted
Services
- Email this article to a friend
- Find similar articles in BMJ
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Related Content
- General practice / family medicine
- Relevant Article
- Find this article in its weekly table of contents
Bookmark with
What's new
Latest blogs
Services
Tools
Online poll
Resources
Rapid responses for this article
There are no rapid responses for this article.Most read
Print issues
