TITLE

Letter: G.P.s' and family planning

AUTHOR(S)
Craig, A
PUB. DATE
June 1974
SOURCE
British Medical Journal;6/8/1974, Vol. 2 Issue 5918, p563
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
No abstract available.
ACCESSION #
64110711

 

Related Articles

  • We must fight for rights of GPs with families. Fabre, Clarissa // Pulse;9/21/2011, Vol. 71 Issue 30, p18 

    A letter to the editor is presented in which the author shares her views regarding the need to fight for the rights of general practitioners (GPs) with families.

  • We owe it to the planet to talk to patients about family size. Hayes, Pip // Pulse;8/13/2008, Vol. 68 Issue 27, p13 

    A letter to the editor is presented about the role of general practitioners (GPs) to talk to their patients concerning family size in the 2008 issue.

  • A recipe for disaster? Lee, Andrew C. K. // BMJ: British Medical Journal (Overseas & Retired Doctors Edition;8/7/2010, Vol. 341 Issue 7767, p265 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to a plan by the coalition government of Great Britain to implement commissioning by consortiums of general practitioners (GPs).

  • Your views: Access to patient records. Fitton, Richard // GP: General Practitioner;4/29/2013, p29 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "What do the DH's IT Plans Mean for GPs?," in the March 18, 2013 issue of the journal.

  • Sticking salaried GPs on sundowner shifts puts Us on road to polyclinics. Seville, M. H. // Pulse;3/19/2008, Vol. 68 Issue 10, p22 

    A letter to the editor is presented which comments on the plans of the British government to request general practitioners (GPs) to have evening shifts.

  • Overseas GPs should be treated equally.  // Pulse;2/3/2010, Vol. 70 Issue 3, p11 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "GMC reveals plan for crackdown on foreign GPs" in the previous issue.

  • A poisoned chalice? Strong, Mark // BMJ: British Medical Journal (Overseas & Retired Doctors Edition;8/7/2010, Vol. 341 Issue 7767, p265 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to a plan by the coalition government of Great Britain to implement commissioning by consortiums of general practitioners (GPs).

  • Cutting QOF cash the wrong approach. Nicholson, Spencer // Pulse;12/10/2008, Vol. 68 Issue 43, p21 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Plans revealed to slash GPs' QOF earnings."

  • Are the powers that be scared to consult us? Morris, Ian // Pulse;2/11/2009, Vol. 69 Issue 4, p22 

    A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "GPs frozen out of Darzi plan rollout" in the previous issue of the journal.

  • Opinion: Your Say Online.  // GP: General Practitioner;1/21/2013, p29 

    Several letters to the editor are presented in response to articles in previous issues including one on the demand of general practitioners (GP) for funding of premises, family test to GPs and one on female GPs in Great Britain.

Share

Other Topics