Responses

Download PDFPDF
Prevention Pays—Lessons from the Chief Medical Officer’s Annual Report: five years on
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Policy reviews 5 years after valuable in holding to account
    • Mitch E BLair, Professor of Paediatrics and Child Public HEalth Imperial College London

    Lemer has very usefully carried out a 5 year review of policy implementation. Policy is only as good as the receivers at the other end and these change frequently along with an ever changing political and economic landscape.Thus the exercise is valuable in not only taking stock but also reminding those in power of an independent review process with recommendations which should transcend governments. Sadly , the focus on funding education of the workforce (recommendations 10-12) do not appear to have been a priority and without this foundation, we will not move ahead sufficiently fast with a child and family friendly service. The Children and Young Persons Outcomes Framework is similarly the result of much work in a previous government and must not be allowed to whither on the vine. Perhaps we should regularly remind policy makers in the current administration of the value of persistence with other such initiatives which have a broad professional consensus and can be dusted off and re-badged as necessary to tempt politicians to move the goal posts a little closer to what is required to optimize child health? Lets see how far we have got in another 5 years.

    Conflict of Interest:
    I was one of the chapter authors of the CMO report.