
doi: 10.1192/bjp.159.1.1
pmid: 1888955
During the last two years, the medical profession in Britain has been participating in a public debate – perhaps in a more exposed way than for some time. Eminent Presidents have been writing letters to The Times, and less eminent ones demonstrating in Downing Street. This can all be seen as contributions to the discussion on the state of the National Health Service. But there is, I believe, a wider and in my view a more long-lasting change going on, namely the relationship between the medical profession and the public – the citizens of this country. You may feel that the basic premise is based on a false dichotomy, rather like the sterile debates on community care. Hospitals are part of the community. Doctors are citizens. Yet there is an implicit or explicit contract, social if not financial, between a country's medical profession and its citizens. As we are in the era of negotiating or inventing or specifying contracts, I wanted to consider this.
Psychiatry, Social Responsibility, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Humans, Forensic Psychiatry, United Kingdom
Psychiatry, Social Responsibility, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Humans, Forensic Psychiatry, United Kingdom
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 17 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
