Against women: are we looking after our general practitioners? GPs' views of the 1990 part-time contract

A postal survey was conducted looking at the roles and experiences of General Practitioners on part-time contracts. This involved their perception of the attitudes of their colleagues and patients to their part-time status, and the consequences of these for their professional development. Of the 130 General Practitioners with part-time contracts in the one Regional Health Authority that was being surveyed 77.7% responded; 74.3% of the respondents were women. Of the women General Practitioners who responded to this particular question, the predominant age-bands were 31-40 years [41.4% (41)] and 41-50 [19.2% (19)], whilst male General Practitioners were more evenly spread across the age bands. The results showed that the majority of General Practitioners took up part-time contracts to enable them to look after their dependants, though a sizeable minority wished for free time or to relieve stress from a full-time contract. Forty percent said that they felt excluded from decision making about continuity of patient care and practice policy. Just under forty percent also stated that their workload was excessive in comparison with their full-time counterparts. Further, many expressed the opinion that they were financially penalised. The cost effective correlation between the increased availability of General Practitioners (particularly women) for patient care, and the costly medical education and training of such General Practitioners not being 'wasted' for several years was also noted together for the need for ongoing (or continual) medical education and training. The findings of this survey suggest there are many unresolved issues involved in satisfactory part-time contracting arrangements for General Practitioners. This particularly affects women General Practitioners. Whilst the RCP policy statement addresses education and training for general practice, the question of not losing out in relation to training opportunities and promotion is not addressed. The unresolved effects of the intra-professional differences in opportunities may affect the inter-professional functioning of the primary health care team and ultimately continuity and quality of care for patients.