Chaz, Your attitude towards doctors saddens me, and I don't think it's justified. You are absolutely right that it's the job of ALL HCPs to do what's best for our patients. That's why we give up our free time to study and go on courses, that's why we come into work early and go home late, that's why we grasp opportunities to learn things that will increase our ability to help our patients, that's why we work extra hours for free, i could go on... In my experience, the group of HCPs that do these things most frequently are the doctors. And we we do this preciesely because we care deeply about our patients. Senior doctors get frustrated when things aren't done properly. This is because they have the knowledge and experience to know what can happen when things are done wrong and what can happen if people insist on following protocols rather than listen to someone who knows what he's talking about. If people aren't told when they are messing up, how are they ever supposed to learn? On the whole though, I think doctors are far more likely to criticise other doctors than they are other HCPs. If you read the original post by Dr Crippen you'll see that he was pleased with the treatment that Andrew got and only criticiesd the cardiologists (other doctors) at the end for not taking the time to explain what happened to the patient. Protocols are incredibly useful and, in the vast majority of cases the correct protocol will bring benefit to our patients. However, they should never stop people from thinking about what they are doing. In my opinion, it is unacceptable for a HCP to cause harm or potential harm (eg by delaying definitive treatment) to a patient, even if the protocol says to do so. Really, in an ideal world, we wouldn't need protocols because everyone would know what they are doing. You may be "inclined to go with the 'less qualified' ambulance service if you have an emergency" but aren't you forgetting that, if it really is an emergency, they'll take you to the feet of another doctor? - Michael