Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Salisbury is spot on in her discussion of the NHS’s hostile position towards healthcare provision for overseas visitors (Comments, 21 September), but education is the solution! Junior doctors need more training in dealing with the complex issues surrounding the healthcare rights of foreign nationals, and this should start during medical school. The increasingly hard-line attitudes of successive governments towards this topic has further complicated the role of clinicians.
We work in a resource short, Brexit-obsessed world, where obtaining translators in clinical settings can be difficult. Combine this with emergency departments decorated with anti-healthcare tourism posters and we run the risk of Doctors themselves losing site of their core professional values. We must remind ourselves that the priorities of the ‘overseas visitors office’ are not necessarily the top priorities of Doctors. Equally, we should tell ourselves and our patients that as physicians we do not work for the home office and that as their Doctor we exist to put their best interests first.
As our society grows increasingly diverse we as a profession need to clarify our position so that we can be confident and uniform in our approach to immigration issues. We risk under-representing the people who need our advocacy most. Inadvertently strengthening an emergency care revolving-door mentality for these patients is a public health issue as much as a political one. When will the government listen?
Re: Helen Salisbury: A hostile environment in the NHS
Salisbury is spot on in her discussion of the NHS’s hostile position towards healthcare provision for overseas visitors (Comments, 21 September), but education is the solution! Junior doctors need more training in dealing with the complex issues surrounding the healthcare rights of foreign nationals, and this should start during medical school. The increasingly hard-line attitudes of successive governments towards this topic has further complicated the role of clinicians.
We work in a resource short, Brexit-obsessed world, where obtaining translators in clinical settings can be difficult. Combine this with emergency departments decorated with anti-healthcare tourism posters and we run the risk of Doctors themselves losing site of their core professional values. We must remind ourselves that the priorities of the ‘overseas visitors office’ are not necessarily the top priorities of Doctors. Equally, we should tell ourselves and our patients that as physicians we do not work for the home office and that as their Doctor we exist to put their best interests first.
As our society grows increasingly diverse we as a profession need to clarify our position so that we can be confident and uniform in our approach to immigration issues. We risk under-representing the people who need our advocacy most. Inadvertently strengthening an emergency care revolving-door mentality for these patients is a public health issue as much as a political one. When will the government listen?
Competing interests: No competing interests