Thread: The letter about a renewed FAL comes to his GP.

Must say, the letter's wording is very reasonable. I had dreaded it wouldn't be.

Does one of these get sent to everyone's GP?

Originally Posted by jakewire

Does one of these get sent to everyone's GP?

As I understand it, in the future it will be sent for all new applications and renewals. I see issues arising from this and think there will be matters related to it that will eventually end up being challenged in the courts.

What concerns me most is that knowing that there is an obligation on their doctor to inform Police could cause some people who truly need a doctor’s help, to avoid getting the help they need.

I am also concerned about how conflicted between a perceived obligation (not aided by the Police ambiguity in their use if the words “must consider notifying”) and patient confidentiality many doctors will feel.

It is also not the case that everyone has a single health practitioner that they attend when ill (many just rock up to an A&E).

The bit that really worrys me is the bit in Red.... It is as though they are expecting to send them to the wrong person from time to time. So much for security....

Yes. That bit you highlighted also has undertones of we want to know so we can withhold the FAL because the applicant gave false information. But then I am a cynical old bugger that has lost a great deal of trust.

What's going to happen to people like me that don't have a regular health practioner that they see?

Originally Posted by Scotts

What's going to happen to people like me that don't have a regular health practioner that they see?

And upon the testimony of this credible witness, I rest my case your honour. You are not alone.

Originally Posted by Scotts

What's going to happen to people like me that don't have a regular health practioner that they see?

The onus is on the healthcare practitioner in this instance, so not your concern, although you are required to inform the police of your healthcare provider details, so that could get tricky down the line.

Wife is a GP. This has caused some more eye rolling.

Welcome to 1984.

Fark, my GP is Finnish... knowing her she'll make it conditional on me using a Sako.

Originally Posted by vulcannz

Fark, my GP is Finnish... knowing her she'll make it conditional on me using a Sako.

That is only reasonable. Ha ha ha ha

Originally Posted by vulcannz

Fark, my GP is Finnish... knowing her she'll make it conditional on me using a Sako.

Could be worse- could insist on a Tikka....At least Sako has a little bit more class....

Originally Posted by MB

The onus is on the healthcare practitioner in this instance, so not your concern, although you are required to inform the police of your healthcare provider details, so that could get tricky down the line.

Wife is a GP. This has caused some more eye rolling.

Keen to know what’s required from your wife as a practising GP what her obligations are when she has a patient whom she considers unfit to drive due to age, medication, injuries etc.

Does she make a notification directly to LTNZ who then go about a medical revocation?

Yes, she does. Not sure of the exact process, but she hates those situations. In some instances, people are losing their livelihoods, but they are a clear danger to themselves and others.

Sh1t oh dear, they are going to love this going forwards just for the shear volume of poaperwork they've just dropped thenselves in and they are going to be processing. In the last 15 months of being injured, I've had 6 GP's due to one going on maternity, 3 locums, a temp and I dunno how long the next one is here for.

And this is in a reasonably large centre, I don't know how people will get on in rural areas where there isn't a permanent GP and you work through a practice with a locum attending once or twice a week!