To want MNHQ to get rid of the link to 'I want great care'?

[sallysparrow157]

It's an awful awful website. It is not moderated or validated. Doctors at times have to do things that patients don't like (ie sectioning someone mentally ill, not prescribing methadone for someone who is still using heroin as some extreme examples but even things like not giving antibiotics for a viral infection or not referring someone to something inappropriate), this doesn't make them bad, in fact it makes them better doctors than someone who will do something they think is wrong just to keep the patients happy. However, anyone who has been annoyed by their doctor can post on this site and write whatever abusive things they like and there is no way for the doctor involved to respond.
It is not kept up to date - there are doctors who have been entered as the wrong speciality, doctors down as still practicing who have retired and doctors who have actually been entered on the site after their own death. Relatives of these doctors have contacted the people who run the site and asked for their details to be removed as it is obviously upsetting to know that anyone who fancies it can write abuse on the internet about your dead father, the people who run the site have not done anything about it.
I am a doctor. I undergo constant monitoring of how I do my job, both the clinical side of things and how I communicate with patients and their families. There is an effective complaints/feedback system so if my patients think I am doing something wrong they have a way of letting me know this so I can improve. So I'm not being precious and not wanting anyone to say horrible things about me. I just think that this website is a good way to spout anonymous hatred online about named professionals, if you are that way inclined, and as it is not updated and contains the details of dead and retired doctors but does not contain the details of many doctors working today (including me and everyone else who works in my department - apparently there are no paediatricians in this city...), it is also completely useless.
I'm very disappointed that mumsnet has chosen to publicise it.

are you listening mnhq? You really do not want to be aligning yourself with this sort of thing. You want to take over the world, fine. But can you be like google and not be evil? They are going to benefit from your reputation, mumsnets reputation will only be damaged by this alliance.

First of all, everyone, it is the weekend, give MNHQ, who are probably on a skeleton crew, time to respond beyond what Helen has already said. I would imagine they are discussing the thread.

Snorkler, I am not a doctor. I have had some great and some horrid doctors on the NHS. I still think this site is shit.

How odd, the site seems keen to suggest who to review given that many name are currently reviewless, but the site owner, Dr Neil Bacon, seems less keen on suggesting himself for review.

www.iwantgreatcare.org/en/doctors/search

Perhaps he prefers not to have unverifiable codswollops posted about him given that a confidential relationship means he has no real right od reply ?

Dangerous website. Doctors aren't supposed to be there to do what people want but what is needed, what is safe and what is appropriate. This will not necessarily be what the patient has decided they need.

From experience of complaints against doctors many complaints are down to the patient wanting something that is either inappropriate for them or not safe. For example antibiotics are not going to help a virus no matter how rotten you feel, when antibiotics are required the antibiotic prescribed will be the one most likely to help the diagnosed infection, the doctor is not deliberately prescribing the worst tasting one. Sometimes sleeping tablets are not appropriate and not even safe for the patient. Doing a pregnancy test before some procedures or before prescribing some medication is standard practice not intended as an insult.

Due to confidentiality the doctors complained about on this site cannot explain the rationale behind decisions that are complained about. Therefore the site offers no way to differentiate between genuine concerns (which I recognise with some drs there will be) and complaints of the nature I have stated above.

iwantgreadtcare is a big misnomer as the site does nothing to aid the provision of great care and in fact could damage it as it mainly serves to damage trust and mutual respect between drs and patients. What next someone addicted to something threatens the dr with a bad review if they don't prescribe what would be dangerous for them but they want as it feeds their addiction?

Snorkeler - I'm not a doctor and I think most of the people on this thread aren't.

I have no vested interest whatsoever in criticising this site. I just think it's a bad idea.

bad idea. Perhaps could be saboutaged by inclusion of fake drs?

fastweb - Dr Neil Bacon is not actually a registered doctor at the moment - check the GMC

Just adding my support - seems like a very dubious idea at best, and potentially quite dangerous at worst.

MNHQ, please consider your position re this advertiser.

I will report my post to link to this thread again.

sNorkeler

I'm not a doc, don't even play one on TV.

Mil has bipoar I, heart, circ issues, parkinsons, diabetes, among other illnesses, has has several amputations as well as operations to try an open up her circ, and is a frequant flyer in ambulances.

I've had some failrly shit experiences with docs, unsurprising since I spend so much time in their company. Which is why I think this site is dangerous as well as unethical.

If peole vent their spleen there as an "easy", low cost in terms of time and energy mode of complaining then there will not be the paper trial of past complaints that help support more serious complaints later on down the line.

This site runs the risk of diluting the complaints proceedure, which is in nobody's interests.

Just registering my distaste also.

On the specialty/speciality issue, those who keep saying it is a different word, what is the difference in meaning? Googling is coming up with various explanations, the one which I always thought was that "specialty" is American English while "speciality" is British English. So to me that gave the assumption that the site started off in the US and is trying to expand here, though as a few posters have pointed out, it seems ludicrous and unnecessary in a country with nationalised healthcare.

YANBU

MNHQ Crap idea - backpedal fast imho.

Add message | Report | Message poster ChristinedePizan Sat 03-Sep-11 11:03:00
fastweb - Dr Neil Bacon is not actually a registered doctor at the moment - check the GMC

Presumably niether are the dead and retired docs currently being reviewed on the site.Yet they are considered game on the site.

Sauce for geese, but not the gander is certainly an interesting ethic for the site owner to be putting into practice.

Hideous website, very disappointed that MN are in partnership with it :(. Doctors can't have right of reply when they can't reveal details about the patient.

Horrible site and not a good association for MN. Please have a rethink MNHQ.

Perhaps you could put a nice picture of George Clooney from his ER days in the space when the big green box gets the push?

There seems to be nothing to stop me from adding any number of glowing reports - about myself!!
Really, really badly designed, badly thought through, non-validated site .

Yy re George Clooney

Good point fastweb!

Given that a quick google has shown the way this man is regarded and the reaction from the BMA etc, I can't understand why MNHQ has gotten involved with this site. Particularly as they're not being paid. This thing has been pretty much dead in the water since it's launch in 2008. I can't understand how MN could have gotten involved in a 'partnership' without apparently doing their due diligence. MN has a very popular 'brand', and to protect that surely you'd check out any potential 'partners'? Is someone at HQ related to this man, and this is the equivalent of offering your feckless nephew an internship to do your sister a favour? I'm sure that's totally wide of the mark, I just can't understand why they would choose to link their name with his. It tarnishes the brand.

100% in agreement that this is an irresponsible and distasteful site for MN to be supporting and hope the decision to promote it will be reconsidered once the weekend is over.

snorkeler not a doctor and I still think you're a loon. You are so far a lone voice. Sorry didn't get it last time what is your terrible illness that every single doctor is crap at missing. LMFAO

Agreed, definitely time for a re-think. I'm fairly sure there are statistics relating to how disgruntled people place reviews/ comments/ complaints far more often than happy people. Obviously, read clients/ patients/ customers for people. Rather than just folk who are a bit pissed off with life.

Gawd, can you tell I got no sleep last night?

Another voice here adding to the consensus that MN should not be partners with this website. It is very unsavoury and, frankly, reckless.

That's a bit much Fuckthis. I wouldn't want this to turn into na bun fight and distract from the issue.

Also not a doctor.

PacificDogwood
There seems to be nothing to stop me from adding any number of glowing reports - about myself!!

-

Exactly. Anybody can write anything, good, bad or indifferent. Valid or complete codswollop. For alturistic, self interested or revenge/mischief based motives.

So a fat lot of good it does prospective patients. Based on what you read you could feel inclined to cancel a needed appointment (and face a long wait for anther) based on utter nonsense that undermines your faith before you have even met the doc, or get lulled into such a strong false sense of security that you fail to give due consideration to red flags and misgivngs after the appointment.