For someone who has been intimately involved in healthcare both at the coalface as a registered nurse as well as an academic for over 50 years I am appalled, but not surprised, at the current wave of negativity concerning the Federal Government’s Health Reform Plan.

Illustration: The Australian's Bill Leak

Not only is the commentary negative, it is also blatantly misinformed in the majority of cases. But more concerning than this is the fact that mainstream debates around the issues at stake have been once again hijacked by the vested interests who have the most to lose by substantial changes to the current system.

Leading this negative commentary is the Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott,  the Minister for Health when money was being siphoned from the health system.

Like so many politicians before him, Abbott’s agenda was influenced by the most powerful interest group in health: the medical profession. 

As a result he refused to appoint a Chief Nurse – something vital to the more effective running of a complex system such as health – preferring instead for the Chief Medical Officer to speak on behalf of the nursing profession.

The former Health Minister also ignored requests for nurse practitioners to be fully recognized for their clinical expertise – something that would have also improved the efficiency and effectiveness of health care delivery.

By contrast, Nicola Roxon has delivered on her promise to right these wrongs. We now have a Chief Nurse and Nurse Practitioners will be reimbursed appropriately, as well as being recognized for the key role they play across the health care system.

After years of neglect, at last a federal government is attempting to rebuild a system which has been denuded of funds and which has turned its back on the specific needs of those with chronic and complex conditions and indigenous and rural populations in particular.

States have been allowed to focus their resources on hospitals as if their walls were impervious to other areas of need such as preventive and primary healthcare, including dental and mental health needs.

Why is the focus almost exclusively on waiting lists for surgery when, as Australian of the Year, Professor Patrick McGorry keeps pointing out, someone takes their own life every 4 hours in this country? Why aren’t we agitating for resources to prevent suicides and a lifetime of misery for so many?

As usual, doctors have been given all the airplay and column inches over the last two weeks – doctors who speak authoritatively on the needs of the community, as if they are the chosen spokespeople.

But for those of us in the system who are aware of what agendas lie behind those who claim to speak on behalf of the community, we sense the fear underlying the statements.

The medical profession may claim that its concern is that any change will alter the “sacred relationship between doctor and patient” or increase the waiting lists (a furphy if ever there was one!) But for those of us in the know, it’s hard not to hear their rhetoric as an attempt to capitalize on the fears of the sick and vulnerable while seeking to ensure their status, both financially and socially.

I listen to these debates, as I have for many, many years, with interest and skepticism - ever hopeful to hear a nurse or patient being interviewed. It rarely happens. What the media and the broader community fail to grasp is that nurses have a unique perspective on the issues at stake as their agenda is simple: to be able to provide quality care to each individual patient.

As salaried workers, any change to the system won’t alter their financial status as it might for so many other groups of health professionals, particularly doctors.

Nurses also have a better understanding of what people need and want when they are sick as they provide the majority of one-on-one care to patients. And so they need to be consulted as to the correct structures which will support their ability to deliver appropriate care . Yet where are their voices in the debate ? Why are they rarely interviewed on the media or included in policy discussion?

There are many theories as to why nurses have been largely omitted from public debate or higher level decision making in health. One school of thought was that nursing was marginalized because of it being a predominately female profession in a patriarchal culture – but that doesn’t hold up now that the medical profession has equal numbers of women in its ranks without losing its voice of authority.

Perhaps it’s the fact that, despite requiring a university degree and a high level skill-set, nurses are still seen as ‘handmaidens’ doing the ‘dirty work’ – working with their hands and hearts rather than their heads.

In 2010 however I would have hoped that such outmoded ideas no longer had traction. I call on this Federal Government and the media to include more nurses in decision making and debate – particularly those nurses who work at the interface between the hospital system and the community.

These are the nurses who are forced to confront the messy reality of a complex and dynamic system – to deliver care which is both safe and context appropriate. They have learned to rely on their own resourcefulness rather than standing around waiting and blaming others.

62 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Jamie says:

      06:30am | 09/03/10

      Here we go with the poor nurse being left out of the equation cry. Well if nurses who only have a fraction of the training and not really sacrificed much to get their degree want more say in running the system then they have to show Australia they have what it takes. Lets have a higher entry for nursing degrees, lets put nurse practs through the same difficult exams and hospital responsibilities as junior doctor. Let see them do 48 hr shifts where they have to be thinking and making life and death decisions. Do the hard work and then you can say you understand how medicine works. The fact is in this day and age we live in a country where a nurse who wants more clinical responsibility can enter a graduate medical course to be trained to do a more difficult job, unfortunately some nurses would like to have more say without the hard work or responsibility aka the Labor party way.

    • Evan Findlay says:

      08:12am | 09/03/10

      Jamie you are proudly showing off your ignorance. In a lot of cases it is the nurse that makes the life and death decision. When a code blue is called who do you think reaches the patient first! I can guarantee you it is not the doctor. And if nurses could not understand how medicine works then why do we allow them to administer dangerous drugs, why do they have the responsibility of chemotherapy. And as for stating that nurses who don’t work hard or lack responsibility should forgo a say on health matters just proves what an ignorant buffoon you are. I’ve know a lot of doctors during my years in healthcare and some of them I would not take my dead dog to for an opinion.

    • Gerard says:

      11:36am | 09/03/10

      Well said Jamie. It takes a TER of 51% and well above 90% to gain entry to a medical school. A couple of years training at a pretend university course does not change the fact that doctors are on average a lot smarter and better trained than nurses. “Activist” nurses have overplayed the Florence Nightingale card to the point where health administration is now infested with no-hopers. This is what has sent health broke.

    • Gary Cox says:

      11:38am | 09/03/10

      Not sure I’m on the same page Jamie. My wife is a nurse and is on $23 hour before penalties which is horsesh!t considering she went to uni for 3 years, puts up with arrogant doctors who expect them to do most of the work and take most of the responsibilty too as well as cleaning up poo, spew and having folk drop dead on you. I was on that much money 10 years ago when I left school and did some unskilled labouring on a CFMEU site. Now my wife is doing a postgrad course which includes doing 600 hours unpaid work. I reckon she’s mad, for even being a nurse in the first place. I wouldn’t do it.

    • Scot says:

      01:10pm | 09/03/10

      Ms. Lumby, If you are saying that the previous Liberal Government reduced expenditure in health then show us the numbers, as we know this not to be true. Also at the same time please tell your readers how many bureaucrats have been added to the NSW health system by the NSW Labor government during this time. The whole system is a joke, it is now so over managed we have ended up with a third world health system governed by socialist that only look after their own best interest at the expense of the public. One only has to look at what they have done to Royal North Shore Hospital and country hospitals that have more bureaucracy than health staff over paid and under worked.

    • Judy Lumby author says:

      08:16pm | 09/03/10

      Jamie You have reinforced my point exactly—this is not about a system for medicine—it is a system of health care and as such deserves to be debated through a variety of voices including nurses and the general population who fund it .It isnt a debate about who is most educated or works the hardest but about making the very best decisions for our society

    • David says:

      11:07pm | 09/03/10

      Jamie, firstly a point of order.  48 hour shifts are now banned by law as they endanger patient’s lives.  This is for all staff. 

      Now, as a health professional that is neither a nurse or a doctor, I will say this - I agree with Ms Lumbly on one point, and that is that the debate is too mono-focused on doctors.  However, including just the nurses isn’t going to help matters too much.  All facets of the health industry need to be consulted.  Diagnositcs [pathology and radiology], pharmacy, allied health [physiotherapy, speech pathology etc], even hotel services and maintenance.  And do you know why?  For years various state governments have blathered on how they’ve been “trimming the fat” from the health department.  Well that is a blatant lie.  The health departments of Australia don’t have any fat.  In fact they have been cut down to the bone and it is no wonder that the public system is falling over.  It is also no wonder that every single health employee that I know has private health insurance.

      To insinuate that _anyone_ in the health system does not do hard work or take responsibility for matter far past their job description simply proclaims your ignorance on the subject and is deeply insulting.  People that work for the public system don’t do it for the money [which is pitiful], they do it because they feel a duty to help other people.  Those that don’t feel this duty burn out and quit within the first five years of starting work.

    • Jon says:

      02:24pm | 10/03/10

      Yes David so if doctors aren’t doing 48hr shifts then how do you think this health system is being kept together? Fairy dust? Most of the doctors is this country work hard and put up with so much crap from people who choose to bear no clinical responsibility yet want to have a say in how things are run. Well the next time your loved one is sick go find the next well rested nurse for medical advise..

    • Eric says:

      07:34am | 09/03/10

      “One school of thought was that nursing was marginalized because of it being a predominately female profession in a patriarchal culture – but that doesn’t hold up now that the medical profession has equal numbers of women in its ranks without losing its voice of authority.”

      It’s so refreshing to see an article that doesn’t blame men for everything!

    • Fog Badger says:

      07:45am | 09/03/10

      With all due respect, I do tire of this goody-two-shoes nurses versus money-hungry doctors BS!

    • Judy Lumby author says:

      08:24pm | 09/03/10

      I was trying to make the point that we need multiple voices in a debate about healthcare for the whole society—iI dont doubt the difficult job doctors have or the fact that they are very bright and work hard

    • DocBud says:

      08:01am | 09/03/10

      “Leading this negative commentary is the Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott,  the Minister for Health when money was being siphoned from the health system.”

      Ah, the big lie rears its ugly head:

      http://www.cis.org.au/policy/summer_06/summer_06_pdfs/summer_2006_norton.pdf

      “As can be seen, even in the traditional areas of social democratic spending
      emphasis such as education, health and social security, the Howard overnment has increased real per capita expenditure at a higher rate than
      the Keating government did during its last three years.”

      “For someone who has been intimately involved in healthcare both at the coalface as a registered nurse”

      “As a result he refused to appoint a Chief Nurse”

      ‘By contrast, Nicola Roxon has delivered on her promise to right these wrongs.”

      Sounds very much like a vested interest pushing a partisan agenda. Is this article a case of returning a favour or two?

    • Grumbles says:

      01:44pm | 09/03/10

      I’m glad you mentioned the lie, I for one am sick of hearing it. Whats more, is this is a crap offer, the Federal Government currently pays 40% of hospital cost, and under this new scheme it will pay 60% of efficient hospital costs. There is no new money in the system, or any new beds. Less useful than a bandaid on a pimple.

    • steve says:

      08:07pm | 09/03/10

      Docbud
      Docbud wants us to believe a Liberal policy statement as gospel.
      If you actually look at the government expenditure & committee minutes from Howard’s tenure, you will find the facts do not correlate with propaganda.
      Excerpt
      “Like so many politicians before him, Abbott’s agenda was influenced by the most powerful interest group in health: the medical profession”.
      Is there a comprehension problem here Docbud?
      You are falling into the same tired old retort. True criticism of factual failures are seen as a sleight on your bias.

    • DocBud says:

      07:05am | 10/03/10

      I haven’t got a clue what you are talking about, Steve. Maybe you should comment before hitting the bottle of an evening.

      Perhaps you could reference some relevant “government expenditure & committee minutes”.

    • Sherlock says:

      08:43am | 09/03/10

      Would have been a much better article if the writer bothered to tell us why she thinks the government’s new health plan is so good. Unfortunately that minor detail appeared to slip her mind and the article reverts to being a mish-mash of political partisanship and slagging off at doctors.

      It’s just a waste of bandwidth

    • Kim says:

      01:34pm | 09/03/10

      I agree Sherlock.  Also:
      The medical profession may claim that its concern is that any change will alter the “sacred relationship between doctor and patient” or increase the waiting lists (a furphy if ever there was one!)

      Who in the medical profession has said this?  Can you point us to actual details please?

    • Doc Brown says:

      08:54am | 09/03/10

      “Like so many politicians before him, Abbott’s agenda was influenced by the most powerful interest group in health: the medical profession.”

      Who else should he have listened to? Certainly not tertiary-trained nurses, who today won’t go near a patient because its beneath them!!

    • Carrie Miller says:

      09:19am | 09/03/10

      Hi Doc Brown. As someone who just spent 2 days in the Cardiac Assessment Ward of St George Public Hospital and I can tell you that tertiary-trained nurses not only came near me, they changed my sheets and got me sandwiches as if they were air hostesses. This, in addition, to providing excellent specialised clinical care. This is not to say the doctors weren’t also excellent - but it was the nurses who were there contstantly, monitoring me and checking I was ok. I only saw the doctors on their rounds once a day which is fine but it does reinforce Lumby’s point that nurses have a unique perspective on how the health care system operates, and more importantly, what patients need from it.

    • Evan Findlay says:

      10:24am | 09/03/10

      Doc Brown. I on a regular basis work in ICU and can guarantee you that the nurses do not leave your side and if they do another nurse replaces them.  Just more misinformation and mistruths from another supporter of Abbotts Big Taxing Army. Not only is your statement ignorant it is also a blatant lie.

    • Doc Brown says:

      12:24pm | 09/03/10

      Carrie and Evan, I wonder if your nurses had uni degrees or tertiary TAFE qualifications. My comments were directed at the uni graduates.

      The only thing that will fix the system is to revert back to how it was 35 years ago, when the system ran itself efficiently, without umpteen layers of beaurocracy, when doctors and nurses had a say in how the hospital should run and there was minimal government involvement.

    • Dick Sherwill says:

      10:36am | 27/03/10

      Hi Doc.
      I trained under the old system and worked at the bedside for many years. Then I taught trainee nurses under the same system. In the meantime, I completed my undergraduate degree and then postgraduate studies. I have worked with both old- and new-style nurses and have no doubt that there are, as with any large group of people, good and less-than-good among them (as with doctors).
      I would be entirely happy to be cared for by the majority of the tertiary-trained nurses with whom I have worked (many of whom have helped me to change wet or faecally soiled bed linen in the process of making a patient clean and comfortable!)
      The point that you seem to miss is that there is a large segment of the health workforce whose opinion is sought less than it should be, a sentiment that is no doubt shared by the allied health professionals reading these postings.

    • Sue says:

      08:58am | 09/03/10

      The long-promised hospital reform was suddenly announced by Rudd to deflect the Peter Garrett insulation mess. And he succeeded in directing the press away from Mr Garrett. Henceforth no further headlines about the lives lost, houses burned down, home-dwellers now living in fear and the extra $48M of OUR MONEY to rectify the mess!

      What commentators fail to discuss is that health reform is not possible without due attention to the potential financial implications contained in the HENRY TAX REVIEW—- the publicly-funded review that Kevin Rudd will not permit the Australian people to see.

      Swan and Rudd have been in possession of this review since December 2009, and as each month passes, we get closer and closer to the election—- without the privilege of reading the review that we paid for.  We are also kept at a safe distance, for the longer it is withheld, the less opportunity for the press to ask penetrating questions.

      Without due consideration to the Henry Tax Review, hospital reform costings will be no more than a phantom exercise.

      We the people are entitled to scrutinise the Henry Tax Review . It’s high time that it is made public, so we can factor in what Rudd is contemplating on health, and the financial feasibility.

      If anyone thinks that the Opposition is being given a fair chance to make alternative policies without seeing the Henry Tax Review, then think again.

    • John A Neve says:

      09:16am | 09/03/10

      Surely the Henry Tax Review is a non event.  What we need is an all encompassing taxation debate.

      Did we ever debate the GST? NO

      Have we ever looked at other ways of taxing this nation? NO

      What we keep doing is tinkering with an outdated and failed system.
      This country needs a Financial Debits Tax, one tax that covers all.
      The current PAYE system puts all the burden on the workers and the top end of town love it.

    • DT says:

      09:29am | 09/03/10

      You can bet your soon to be levied extra taxes that PM Rudd wants to keep the Henry Tax Review under wraps until after the next election, if Labor wins another term.

    • DT says:

      09:26am | 09/03/10

      The fact is that under Howard’s Coalition Commonwealth spending on health increased from 15% of total budget spending in 95/96 under Labor to 22% in 06/07 or from $20-b to $47.6-b however, as PM Rudd recently admitted state-territory governments have spent much of Commonwealth monies directed to health on other things. It should also be remembered that GST revenue was designed to boost state-territory revenue to reduce the need for Commonwealth funding, Rudd now proposes to claw back 30% of GST from the states to fund extra Commonwealth spending on health, so where is the real extra money? Final point, a former senior public servant on Lateline recently indicated that in NSW alone there is a small army of admin public servants in health costing taxpayers a huge amount of money and doing little or nothing for health, meanwhile hospitals struggle with too few working doctors and nurses, this situation also applies to Qld Health and no doubt others. The waste of monies by Labor governments over the past 15 years or so is a national scandal and has resulted in our services declining and infrastructure deteriorating and falling behind demand. Rudd’s health announcement is a smokescreen, he knows that we want a better system but his looks to me like another debacle on the way because of his lack of planning and consultation, a hallmark of this government and its thought bubbles.

    • eye4aneye says:

      01:10pm | 09/03/10

      they havn’t wasted money DT - they’ve secured votes by creating a bloated public service dependant on them filling the trough with public funds (completly sound investment from their point of view).

      Smart in an evil wasteful make society dependant on us so we can’t be removed way.

    • Steven Danno says:

      09:52am | 09/03/10

      For the first time in my career I feel embarrassed to say that I am a nurse. Not because of the argument put forward in the article but by the vitriol of the some of the commentators here, obviously doctors, who seem to regard the nursing profession as the enemy or at best an appendage that operates at the behest of poor busy overworked doctors. Making a life and death decision 48 hours into a continuous shift isn’t bravery or a medical work ethic issue, it is simply negligence. These same people also choose to forget who taught them to wash their hands, cannulate a patient, do a dressing, maintain sterility and so on when they were useless dangerous interns. Sure there are dodgy nurses just as there are dodgy doctors and dodgy politicians but I have not felt professionally attacked previously and regarded my career with some professional pride.

      Don’t let us make the mistake that because a doctor is highly skilled and trained in his area of expertise that they also have the requisite skills and knowledge to run a complex adaptive and changing health system and provide high level advice to government on the range of issues to the exclusion of others people working in the system. 

      The debate has to be representative of all areas of the health system from the ground up. The world is bigger than that and Rudd seems to be listening for the first time in history to the clinicians, lets make sure he gets the whole picture and the medical lobby gets equal airing with the rest of us.

    • Carrie Miller says:

      02:45pm | 09/03/10

      Hear Hear Steven Danno. You are the voice of reason on this forum. You accurately reflect what the author was saying which was not that doctors are evil and should have no say but rather that other stakeholders should also be included in a debate about., as you say, a “complex adaptive and changing health system”. People seemed to have missed Lumby’s assertion that it’s not only nurses but patients that need to be heard. Anyone that claims that doctors don’t dominate the debate and have a huge influence on policy needs a reality check.

    • me says:

      09:58am | 09/03/10

      It’s a pity that this article is attractting such negative comments. It raises some good points.

    • SapperK9 says:

      10:09am | 09/03/10

      The only Trade Union Joh Bjelke could not break; the AMA, most powerful union in the nation.  Perhaps what we really need is AMPC (Australian Medical Profession Commission) co-located with the ABCC?

    • Fog Badger says:

      04:11pm | 09/03/10

      The AMA certainly does not represent the majority of medical practitioners, particularly (not) GPs. The media just loves describing the AMA as the ‘doctors union’. Stupid really.

    • TracyS says:

      03:29pm | 19/03/10

      The AMA is not a Trade Union - it is not allowed to be under the regulatory framework in Australia as many of its members are self employed and run their own businesses - and it does not have the right to call for industrial action from its members. Labelling it as a union is simply inaccurate.

    • PaulW says:

      10:26am | 09/03/10

      But for those of us in the system who are aware of what agendas lie behind those who claim to speak on behalf of the community

      Speaks she of no agenda whats so ever!  That is just so amazing that you speak without an agenda as well.  Or maybe you do have your own agenda , like maybe lying about Abbott and the Liberals denuding funds from the system when that is false.  Have a look at the link and tell me where on the graph does it show commonwealth spending on health going down at all

      http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/03/08/did-howard-cut-health-spending/

      What the media and the broader community fail to grasp is that nurses have a unique perspective on the issues at stake as their agenda is simple: to be able to provide quality care to each individual patient.

      And well they might, but surprisingly I think doctors too also want to provide quality care to each individual patient as well

      There are many theories as to why nurses have been largely omitted from public debate or higher level decision making in health. One school of thought was that nursing was marginalized because of it being a predominately female profession in a patriarchal culture – but that doesn’t hold up now that the medical profession has equal numbers of women in its ranks without losing its voice of authority.

      Then why even mention it, unless you want to get that thought out without directly making that accusation.

    • halberstram says:

      10:32am | 09/03/10

      I’m sick and tired of redneck radio commentaors and uninformed politicians telling us this plan doesn’t provide for “one more doctor, one more nurse, one more bed”

      This simplistic cliche is an indictment on the level of public policy debate in this country.

      The first thing that needs to be tackled in health policy is efficiency and productivity.

      This plan goes some way to addressing that rather than just throwing more money which is inevitably wasted.

      More beds are not the answer.

    • Fog Badger says:

      04:15pm | 09/03/10

      More beds. nurses and doctors is critical.

    • preciouspress says:

      10:57am | 09/03/10

      Doctors and their trade union are very proficient in identifying what is wrong with our Health System and laying blame at the door of governments. I am sure governments would appreciate some action from the AMA to cut expenditure and promote efficiency within their own bailiwick for example:
      - Over servicing
      - Improved prescription of medication, with the patient having primacy not pharmaceutical companies
      - Unnecessary repetition of referrals between GPs and specialists
      Physicians as you diagnose the ills of the Health system, also heal thyselves.

    • Fog Badger says:

      04:22pm | 09/03/10

      preciouspress,

      Your problems would be solved if a Federal government actually overhauled Medicare. Medicare rewards short consultations (and makes longer consultations largely unviable for a GP to cover costs) and imposes huge amounts of red tape on GPs especially.

    • Anjuli says:

      11:53am | 09/03/10

      There are newly graduated nurses out there who can’t get a job as hospitals are or have canceled the post grad courses ,this happened to my daughter the hospital had accepted her into their course then she received an e-mail saying the course was canceled that was in January . These hospitals are employing overseas nurses via an international employment agency because the hospital is paid to employ them by the agency.Without this post grad ,newly graduated nurses will find it very hard to get a job in the hospitals as they will have to be monitored until they earn the trust of the hospital . It is the same in the UK after the cost of training these nurses they are turning away and doing other things as is the case with a friend of mine she has gone to work for British Telecome .

    • Bryan says:

      01:40pm | 09/03/10

      My Mother was a nurse and retired some 15 years ago. To say that they dont make nurses like that is an understatement. I have been exposed to the Public and Private hospital system more recently of late - attending to my mother’s illness - and can only say that whilst there are a great number of My mother was a nurse and retired some 15 years ago. To say that they don’t make nurses like her or any of her retired colleagues is an understatement. I have recently been exposed to the Public and Private hospital system more of late (attending to my mother’s illness) and can say that whilst there are a great number of nurses that are very good at what they do, there are also a number of them that should not be nurses or think that they are the doctors and walk around with a huge chip on their shoulders. I don’t know whether it is a sign of the times or progress but from a patient or carers point of view things are not what they use to be. The problem appears to be more prevalent in the Public system which at times can only be described as chaotic and uncaring. So if this is progress take me back 25 years!

    • Simon Dons says:

      09:37am | 29/03/10

      Did you go to work with your mum then? Your comparison is flawed.

    • Anthony says:

      02:03pm | 09/03/10

      Almost all doctors in victorian hospitals are on salaries. All new physicians at our local rural hospital are signed up on salaries. I do not see what the point of the article is. Doctors have a better union perhaps?

    • TracyS says:

      03:40pm | 19/03/10

      Anthony, I think you would be surprised at the proportion of doctors who are not salaried in Victoria…

      Of course many of the doctors in government funded public hospitals are salaried, but even in public hospitals you will find some of the doctors working as sub-contractors.

      Most private practices (GP and specialist) are small businesses, and you will find that the doctors working in them are either part owners of the practice or associates (self employed contractors). The arrangements in private hospitals vary, but you will find that most of the doctors are actually self employed.

      This means that outside of the public hospital system it is the doctors who bear the business costs and financial risks of providing health care.

    • Joe says:

      02:29pm | 09/03/10

      Its amusing to see different interests scrambling to take the moral high ground but I wonder why does Australia have a two tier medical system, one for those who can pay and one for those who can’t. Two people suffering the from the same illness will be treated differently on the basis of money. “Doctors” who took the Hypocratic oath administer this discriminatory system and our government subsidises it.
      Thousands of Australians avail of the private health system and are happy to be treated ahead of others who are more seriously ill and consider it OK because they paid for it. I would have thought that one system for everyone is what we should be striving for but then again it’s not as profitable.
      For what it’s worth, I have the highest regard for those doctors and nurses who pursue their careers in the Medicare system and forgo the lucrative money which is to be made in the private system.

    • Tom says:

      02:39pm | 09/03/10

      What exactly does Judy Lumby hope to gain by her demonisation of doctors? She has basically attacked them for daring to argue in their own interests - well newsflash Judy, that is what pretty much every trade union or professional association does and should do for its members - much as you are doing in this article on behalf of nurses.

      Like every profession there are some questionable characters in medicine, but most realise that nurses and doctors are actually quite dissimilar in the tasks they do. However, they are both absolutely necessary to the functioning of the health system.

    • Judy Lumby author says:

      08:35pm | 09/03/10

      Exactly my point Tom—I didnt attack them—just pointed out that they re the dominant voice and a good debate about health deserves other voices
      I respect the work doctors do every day

    • steve jackett says:

      03:25pm | 09/03/10

      to nurses, thanks

    • Tin says:

      04:47pm | 09/03/10

      At a recent dinner a friend of mine who is a sergeant in the army with 25 years experience told me that he takes his orders from junior officers with far less experience because without an orderly hierarchy the army would not function. So I guess the hospital system should work the same way, hierarchy is found in business, government and there is a reason it is there. Labor wants to get ENs to do RN jobs and RNs to do doctor jobs. It is a cheaper option but the quality of care is diluted. An experienced nurse still lacks huge amounts of knowledge whether they care to admit it or not. If nurses want a greater role and responsibility then the training of nurses will have to be re-vamped and the level of expectation and training increased. If that is the case no one will do nursing in university. Welcome to the real world.

    • David says:

      11:20pm | 09/03/10

      I think you’ll find that the health system itself has already identified HUGE labor shortages in the near futre, coupled with aging population and a massive disconnect between the numbers of people leaving the system at the end of their working lives and the numbers of people entering at the start of tehir working lives.  The numbers recently quoted by former Director of WA Health Dr Peter Flett was 4 out for every 1 in.  The departments themselves have seen that we need to up the training and responsibilities of the staff we have if we are to have a health system at all in the next decade.

    • Margaret says:

      06:09pm | 09/03/10

      I attended university when the first intake of nursing students began.  Their curriculum was scientific in approach and many of the advantages that nurses received before this, such as free Hepatitis innoculations and hands on learning, were lost. They were the most stressed students of all the faculties because their workload entailed so much material.  They received little hands on training because the degree was heavily biased towards academic material.

      We know that doctors go through a lot to become a professional. No one disputes that. But hospital care is a two way street and doctors can’t function wiothout the nursing staff to fulfil those functions outside the doctor’s expertise. 

      My gripe is that most patients who go to hospitals for primary medical treatment do so because they can’t afford the high fees GPs charge for a visit. Most doctors don’t bulk bill patients with pension or health care cards.  If they weren’t so against Medicare - as they have been from the get go - the hospital staff could be doing more of the work they were trained for.

    • Dr N.P.Johnson says:

      09:12pm | 09/03/10

      “Most doctors don’t bulk bill patients with pension or health care cards.” Given the bulk-billing rates in this country are well above 70%, and in fact much higher for concession card holders, I wonder what credibility Margaret expects to have. If nurses’ pays were indexed the same way Medicare is indexed, we would have mass rallies outside every Parliament House in Australia. A socialised health system has to ration by its very nature. Sadly the rationing is applied at the bedside, rather than in the halls of administration.

    • Bretto says:

      08:38pm | 09/03/10

      Um, excuse Judy.  What about the Allied Health professions?  They also provide a lot of the one-to-one care as well as having knowledge of the system.  Why can’t they also be included in the discussion of having a say in the health system? Oh I get it.  The fact that you are hopping mad about nurses being left out of the discussion means that you should also be able to leave the Allied Health professions out too.  My apologies Judy, it is an agenda you are running - the same thing you are decrying about the AMA.  A pity your 50 years of RN and academia has left you without the ability to see health in a wider context than just Doctors and Nurses.  So in effect you are just the same as the Doctors, just on the outside looking in.

    • Robert Smissen of Rural SA says:

      09:26pm | 09/03/10

      Judy Lumby sounds like so many nurses who think that they were given the wrong degree by mistake, that their degree should actually read DOCTOR instead of nurse & that they could cure people if it wasn’t for those “bloody doctors”.

    • Simon Dons says:

      09:49am | 29/03/10

      Robert, no Doctor has Doctor on their degree. You can’t unless you have done a Doctorate or PhD.

    • Jane says:

      01:21am | 10/03/10

      You do yourselves all an injustice by setting up demarcation disuptes, petty squabbling and self aggrandisement.

      I hear a lot of people clamouring to be heard and a lot of self congratulation but, not one constructive piece of criticism or advice that will make positive steps toward resolving the waste and inefficiencies.

      Another 10 minutes wasted listening to pointless whining.

      Adults address problems, they do not seek to place blame.

      Identify the areas of the most waste and most inefficiency and I can nearly guarantee they won’t lie at the coalface, the point where the last of the money is placed to achieve the most/only good.

    • IMHO says:

      12:41pm | 10/03/10

      I’m a doctor. I have worked in the public and “private” systems.

      First be under no illusions that we have a fully “private” system. Many people don’t understand that the government contributes money to every private doctor’s consultation or procedure (excluding cosmetic procedures) via the medical benefits schedule (MBS). Typically this contribution has become less, percentage-wise, of the overall medical fee as medical fees have increased at a greater rate than the MBS has been indexed. But the point is, rightly or wrongly, like private education, private medicine remains heavily subsidised by the government.

      Secondly, I think the author, whilst perhaps attempting to contribute constructively to the debate, has instead demonstated her professional biases against and frustrations with a medical industry that obviously will seek to look to it’s own interests, as any industry does, including nurses.

      Thirdly, I support nurses (my wife is one) and think they are ridiculously underpaid. Ridiculously. As are teachers, police officers, and and several other professions dependant on the public purse. Unfortunately this reflects our society’s obsession with the spending of public money on far less important things like football stadiums. Governments have failed to redress this over many years, and have failed to make the case for increasing expenditure on vital professionals like nurses, a profession that does not generate money, but rather embodies, at least ideally, everything that a civilised society stands for - the competent compassionate care of fellow humans in their direst hours of sickness and injury.

      No one thinks it can happen to them until they have it happen to them. That’s when we wonder why we haven’t valued nurses over the years. To a similar degree my comments can be applied to other allied health areas (excluding nonsense like homeopathy and traditional chiropractic).

      It’s my opinion however, that nursing took a wrong turn back when it became degree-based. There are good and bad aspects to both hospital-based and degree-based nursing training but I’m of the view that everything you can learn about being a fantastic, bedside nurse can be learnt sufficiently, if not in superior fashion, in hospital-based training. Nursing is a practical profession, vital to the effective, safe functioning of any hospital. It’s not to say that there is not a place for some academia in nursing, but that should be an option for those who want to go into reasearch or teaching.

      I don’t support independant nurse practitioning! If you want to learn about diagnosis, and wish to order x-rays, and prescribe (as opposed to dispense) drugs, then you want to be a doctor. There is already a training path for this, There shouldn’t be a second one via nursing. The solution to health workforce shortages is not to take professionals from one area of practice, where they are already in short supply, and get them to do the jobs of another group, also in short supply. The solution is to train more of each professional group to do their own jobs, competently.

      Finally I see nothing in Rudd’s plan (at least the bits he has revealed) that will halve the number of health bureaucrats, and double the number of coalface health workers and beds in our hospitals (not to mention, as the author rightly points out, addressing non-hospital based deficiencies in our system). All I see is a hastily conceived plan designed to take our minds off the incompetence of the insulation debacle, not to mention that fact that Rudd has become Big Chief All-Talk-No-Action on most things, not least in the area of health.

    • Jon says:

      02:15pm | 10/03/10

      It seems that Judy is saying that nurses want a voice or say in health issues, and allied health professionals want a say as well. I ask this question if everyone and the government want to have their own vision of health then whom do we follow? Everyone seems they know best, but doctors are the ones that make the diagnosis and bear the medicolegal responsibility the bulk of the time. When something goes wrong with the patient nurses and co run to the nearest doctor don’t they? If we bear the bulk of the responsibility and blame for all that is good or bad then why shouldn’t we bear the responsibility of molding the health system? It seems the author has no idea how health care functions and why the system is breaking down.

    • Peter says:

      03:55pm | 10/03/10

      It’s clear to me that the only thing standing in the way of quality health care in the country is the excessive greed of some doctors. Doctors should be treated like workers in any other proffession (agreed they should be well paid for what they do), but there is no need for private pratice. They should all be employed by the Government. Greedy attitributes have for too long been considered as “patriotism” in this capitalist system of ours and this must stop. It’s time the real patriots stood up and force some good change in this country…

    • TracyS says:

      03:52pm | 19/03/10

      If doctors were all salaried employees of the government, then the government would also have to pick up all the additional costs such as 3rd party and medical indemnity insurance, salaries for support staff such as practice nurses and receptionists, overheads… I can’t see any government in Australia willing to spend that type of money.  Even the “super clinics” are limited to a small number of pilot sites.

    • Dr DK says:

      07:54pm | 10/03/10

      Sorry Professor Lumby,

      But I do not believe that people have “nursing” issues and “medical” issues.

      They have health issues, dealt with by a team including nurses, psychologists, physiotherapists and many other allied health professions, with doctors ultimately guiding and taking responsibility for the process.

      These agitator opinions, that nurses should be practitioners prescribing medications, ordering tests and directing treatment, is frankly insulting and belittles the vitally important role that nurses currently have in our hospitals and community.

      They are not handmaidens that need to better themselves and fight to be released from oppression, and to suggest such a thing to them does nothing but fractionate the health system.

      Just like Medical Officers do in our hospitals, the Chief Medical officer assimilates valuable input from nurses, physiotherapists, dentists and a wide range of allied health professionals, and is an advocate for health in general.

      I fail to see how the appointment of a Chief Nurse is anything other than a political move, and if we are going to do that we should also appoint a Chief Physiotherapist, Chief Occupational Therapist, Chief Ward Clark and even a Chief Orderly and they are all vital members of our health care system.

      If your article is representative of the thought processes that future generations of nurses are being exposed to during their training, I have grave fears for the future cohesiveness of our health care system.

    • TracyS says:

      03:54pm | 19/03/10

      In organisations I have worked with in the past, many of the people who have moved out of clinical roles into senior management roles have been nurses. Indeed, the move into management has been identified as one of reasons there is a shortage of clinical nurses at the coal face. Nurses are already running the health system, so I’m not entirely certain what Judy Lumby is so worried about.

    • Barbara Turner says:

      06:43pm | 29/03/10

      I feel really sad reading all this - we all have important work to be getting on with not wasting time, every-one working in health should have the opportunity to have a say without feeling violated - no wonder domestic violence is so rife when people can become so vicious in a simple discussion. Shame on those who belittle others!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

#markwebber just wasted petrol faster than everyone else in monaco #f1

Anthony Sharwood

In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!

Daniel Piotrowski

The Logies could learn a lot from Eurovision #lamethings#sbseurovision

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ellehardytweets: Already despondent about the next fifty one weeks. #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter