Why are many UK doctors from poor countries?

[Anna B]

It's not just doctors but nurses too.

 

When we need as many good quality jobs as we can muster, why are we not training more of our own nurses? And specialist nurses, physios, etc. I see no reason why we should have to go abroad to find them when we have people here who would jump at the chance.

[loraward]

If generous benefits encourage women to breed and the birth rate in this country at a historic low, do you think that our benefits system is not as generous as it should be?

 

Affordability is just one part the the equation.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 13:18 ----------

 

I don't think it's a myth that we have an increasingly aging population. We need more young people in work, paying taxes so that we can support an aging population.

 

How does increasing the workforce by 3 million help the elderly if all 3 million need benefits to survive, the problems of this country can't be solved by increasing the population which just increases the number of people that are dependent on the state.

[El Cid]

It's not just doctors but nurses too.

 

When we need as many good quality jobs as we can muster, why are we not training more of our own nurses? And specialist nurses, physios, etc. I see no reason why we should have to go abroad to find them when we have people here who would jump at the chance.

 

That is not actually true. The number of foreign born nurses in the NHS is roughly 13%, the same number as in the general population. Its lies preached by those in power that the NHS needs foreign workers.

13% fewer foreigner people in the population, and we would not need the 13% foreign born nurses.

[loraward]

It's not just doctors but nurses too.

 

When we need as many good quality jobs as we can muster, why are we not training more of our own nurses? And specialist nurses, physios, etc. I see no reason why we should have to go abroad to find them when we have people here who would jump at the chance.

 

Short sightedness, it costs money in the short term to train a nurse, so its cheaper to import them. Government as no need to consider the long term consequences, the long term cost, or how it affects the country from which we poach our supply.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 13:31 ----------

 

That is not actually true. The number of foreign born nurses in the NHS is roughly 13%, the same number as in the general population. Its lies preached by those in power that the NHS needs foreign workers.

13% fewer foreigner people in the population, and we would not need the 13% foreign born nurses.

 

Some people find that a difficult concept to grasp.

The foreign born population of the UK is 11.9%, and 11% of NHS are foreign born.

[El Cid]

 

Some people find that a difficult concept to grasp.

The foreign born population of the UK is 11.9%, and 11% of NHS are foreign born.

 

I think that the lower figure of 11% is for lower paid workers.

 

 

The number of foreign-born residents in England and Wales has risen by nearly three million since 2001 to 7.5 million people, the 2011 census shows. That means about one in eight - 13% - of residents were born outside the UK.

[-Boomer-]

The come to upgrade their skills to British standards before returning home. The governemtns of their home countries don't don't like it because they lose out on what they consider to be an acceptable doctor nurse, but overall they get a better product.

[Cyclone]

Does anyone know if the UK puts the commensurate amount of money to the poor countries where the doctors were trained? It's possibly a controversial view, but I think that the UK (or any other wealthy country) should reimburse those countries for the cost of training medics....

 

No, of course they don't. It's a free market thing, if countries want to retain the doctors they train then they need to make it more attractive for them to stay. And if they've had to pay for their own education then that's even more true.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 15:35 ----------

 

Because the last government didn't put plans in place to enable us to cope with the rapid population expansion caused by immigration and the increased fertility rates caused by generous benefits.

 

At which point does this graph show a jump due to rapid population increase down to immigration?

 

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article50256.html

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 15:36 ----------

 

If generous benefits encourage women to breed and the birth rate in this country at a historic low, do you think that our benefits system is not as generous as it should be?

 

Stop trying to bamboozle him with facts. We all know that facts have no place in the world of his imagination.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 15:40 ----------

 

13% fewer foreigner people in the population, and we would not need the 13% foreign born nurses.

 

That would only be true if the entire population were foreign born.

 

13% fewer foreign people in the population would equate to what, a 0.5% reduction in total population, so we'd need 0.5% less nurses.

[loraward]

 

At which point does this graph show a jump due to rapid population increase down to immigration?

 

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article50256.html

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 15:36 ----------

 

 

Stop trying to bamboozle him with facts. We all know that facts have no place in the world of his imagination.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 15:40 ----------

 

 

That would only be true if the entire population were foreign born.

 

13% fewer foreign people in the population would equate to what, a 0.5% reduction in total population, so we'd need 0.5% less nurses.

 

Net migration averaged 250,000 a year since 2000, that's 3,750,000 extra people, some of them have had children, one in four children are born to immigrants, that 200,000 children a year, and the population is only 6,000,000 higher than it was in 2000, this means most of the population growth, about 80% is caused by immigration.

And they all use public services schools, NHS, roads, and they are struggling under the pressure.

[El Cid]

That would only be true if the entire population were foreign born.

 

13% fewer foreign people in the population would equate to what, a 0.5% reduction in total population, so we'd need 0.5% less nurses.

 

Not sure I understand your maths there. 62 million UK population, 38 million of those of working age.

[Cyclone]

I don't have the exact numbers to hand.

 

But imagine that there are 1 million foreign people in the UK.

63 million total people.

We need 1 nurse per 1000 people (for example), so we need 63,000 nurses, of whom, 13% are foreign.

 

If 13% of the foreigners go home, the population drops by 130,000. That means we need 130 fewer nurses. The total number of foreign nurses is 8190 though, in this example.

So we still need 12.79% foreign nurses.

 

When you said

 

"13% fewer foreigner people in the population, and we would not need the 13% foreign born nurses."

The word in bold made you wrong. If the population fell 13% in total, we wouldn't need the 13% nurses.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 16:27 ----------

 

The difference isn't as extreme as that example of course because

 

11.9% of the population are foreign born.

 

---------- Post added 19-04-2015 at 16:29 ----------

 

I don't think we're comparing the same thing though.

 

The census records foreign born, but to be included at all they must be British (or permanently resident maybe) now.

 

Whereas the figures for the NHS are about foreign nationals, ie NOT British.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/26/nhs-foreign-nationals-immigration-health-service