The design of this study was a qualitative design to explore the experiences of Syrian refugees, or so-called status holders, who lived less than four years in the Netherlands with the Dutch General Practitioners (GPs). It was an attempt to hear the voice of these newcomers to inform the health policy-makers about their difficulties from their perspective and an effort to make their voices heard. It was a process of sense-making in a new area which hasn’t discovered before. The participants have been interviewed individually, so they felt free to illustrating their own experience and feeling. Since refugees aren’t a homogeneous population and they came from diverse cultures and countries, they had in their own countries different experiences that may affect their health and their perspective for healthcare in the host country (Burnett & Peel, 2001). In this study, all the participants were city residents in Syria so it was easy to describe the situation in the Syrian cities, on the opposite side, it was difficult to do this in the villages. Since the organization of healthcare in Syria, were the specialist is the primary care provider and in sometimes the pharmacist may be the first care provider, is completely different from its organization in the Netherlands, the free access and choices of the specialist and medicines was preferred by the most participants. Furthermore, the unavoidable and central role of the Dutch GP as a gatekeeper for the secondary care and for the pharmacy produced feelings of helplessness for the most participants in the beginning. This goes in line with the research of Feldmann (Feldmann et al., 2007) were the experience of the Afghan refugees in the Netherlands with the GP is affected to a significant extent with the organization of healthcare in Afghanistan, since, in Afghanistan, also, the people have free access and choices of the specialist. Decreased access to healthcare will, finally, affect health status and will increase the suffering of people who already traumatized, such as refugees, (McKeary & Newbold, 2010). Institute of Medicine Model of Access Monitoring has been used to identify the barriers which influence the health access and outcomes, and these barriers may be used in formulating healthcare policy (Karikari-Martin, 2010). The participants weren’t familiar with the system in the beginning which made some structural access barriers for healthcare. It was clear that nobody has explained for the participants how healthcare is organized in the Netherlands and when they should pay for it. This has changed in a later stage and the participants became more familiar with the new system. The refugees in Sweden had the same experience with the adaptation with the healthcare system in the fact that they weren’t familiar with the new system in the first period (Razavi et al., 2011). Sheikh-Mohammed et al, in their research of the barriers to access to healthcare for newly resettled sub-Saharan refugees, concluded that the lack of information over the healthcare had also a negative effect on the access of refugees for the healthcare in Australia (Sheikh-Mohammed et al., 2006). Difficulties of communication and linguistic barriers were more prevalence among less-educated participants, elderly, the participants who couldn’t communicate in English and some participants in the first year in the Netherlands. The participants were responsible to find a translator when they should visit the GP especially in the first year. High-educated participants and English speakers haven’t faced any actual linguistic barriers. This agrees with a lot of previous related studies such as Afghani refugees in the Netherlands (Feldmann et al., 2007), the refugees in Sweden (Wångdahl et al., 2015) and the refugees in Canada (McKeary & Newbold, 2010). Linguistic barriers, in all these studies, have been faced more by the low-educated participants. In the current research, preparing some words and sentences was the preferred way for the most participants to overcome any possible linguistic barriers. The participants haven’t faced any religious barriers and this is the opposite of a review of McKeary & Newbold who stated that some refugees in Canada have faced barriers related to the religion (McKeary & Newbold, 2010). The participants were affected with the medication culture in Syria and this forms the base for evaluation of the healthcare system in the Netherlands. Thus, the participants were in the beginning shocked because the GP is very conservative in medicines prescription but this, in a later stage, has been changed and the participants begun to understand why the GPs don’t prescribe a lot of medicines. Thus, the participants could adapt with the new system. This agrees with the experience of the refugees in Sweden in Razavi review and the refugees could adapt with the healthcare system in Sweden (Razavi et al., 2011). The consultation hour is short and this made additional access barrier especially for participants who have language barrier and there was a state of ignorance of the patient rights in the Netherlands, for instance the patient has the right to ask for extra time when its needed (double consultation hour). To measure the participants satisfaction, Penchansky and Thomas Health Access Model has been used to support the statement that patient satisfaction with healthcare access will influence utilization of healthcare services. This model is able to identify the effects of healthcare policies on specific people (Karikari-Martin, 2010). In general, the most of participants were satisfied with dealing with the GP. The GP services were accessible, available, acceptable, affordable and adequate for the most of participants. A few of participants faced some difficulties in taking the appointment, in some simple cases, and this related, also, to the participants ignorance of the organization of healthcare in the Netherlands and some participants also faced difficulties with the referral system and the GP refused to transfer them for the specialist. This goes in against the research of O'Donnell were the most refugees in UK faced difficulties in making appointments and referral system (O'Donnell et al., 2007). In this study, the most of participants had a positive perspective and experience with the GP. In the literature, it was difficult to find previous studies which have discussed this specific part but in Sweden, a considerable proportion of refugees had bad experiences with the healthcare system (Wångdahl et al., 2015) while this experience was positive for most of the refugees in UK in the O'Donnell article (O'Donnell et al., 2007). The expectations of the refugees from the GP were related to their experience in Syria and is linked to their experience in the Netherlands. Furthermore, the social source of information has a role in their expectation because the refugees hear to each other and they are affected, to some extent, with the others’ stories especially in the beginning. After some time, each one built his own experience and expectation. Feldmann stated that the information from social resources, for the Afghan refugees in the Netherlands, was a reason to create negative or positive expectations from the GP (Feldmann et al., 2007).