NHS - Is it really that bad?

[andrewb]

Perhaps im bumping up an old'ish thread here but i'd just like to bring it to attention.

As some of you know Ive had a bit of an illness for the last year and the doctors dont seem to know whats up. Basicly to get anywhere I have twice had to pay privately to see a consultant because I simply can't wait for it on the NHS (the time I did go on NHS I didnt even see the consultant, just his assistant).
And now im in a situation where im missing a lot of college due to being sick/inpain so the consultant suggested a CT scan, which we were going to do on the NHS in '2-4weeks' which turned out to be more like 10weeks.

Yet privately, its 4days. Literally 4days.

The NHS is hugely funded.. I can't understand why they can't start devolving some cases privately.. Clearly the NHS infrastructure can't currently cope with the whole country so why not try and sort waiting lists out some more by paying private? APPARENTLY It is cheaper for them to do something on private than NHS, which speaks volumes.

I know somebody's going to come here and say 'what if we were still under the tories'. I know it wasn't good then, but just because its BETTER doesn't mean its satisfactory.. Labour have had 10years to sort this out now..

[cashman]

dont matter really whose in power cyfer its going downhill at a rate of knots, paris went for phsiotherapy today and because the last doc who saw her never put the info on her notes the nurse said sorry i cant treat your back,only your neck. cos yer back aint written on these notes, hell whats things coming too?it beats the hell out of me. seems to me like the nurses are being put in a crap position for the sake of economics.

[steeljack]

Seems we have two interesting threads going on here both about the NHS and the services it provides, and it raises an interesting conundrum, on one hand we have a young person who has never paid a penny into the system requiring treatment and on the other hand we have someone who is obviously a few years older requiring treatment ,and has probably paid into the system all his/her life ....so who gets first/biggest bite at the apple , in a perfect world both would get equal treatment but we know life isn't that way ...most folks below a certain age will say the young un should get it , they haven't had a chance to live yet .......on the other hand older folks will say I've paid all my life I should get first bite.
So I invite everyone to play Solomon and say which way they think treatment should be offered to first , the young un or the owd wrinklie and reasons why.

[bullseyebarb]

Originally Posted by Cyfr

The NHS is hugely funded.. I can't understand why they can't start devolving some cases privately.. Clearly the NHS infrastructure can't currently cope with the whole country so why not try and sort waiting lists out some more by paying private? APPARENTLY It is cheaper for them to do something on private than NHS, which speaks volumes.

Government does nothing well. No way should some bureaucrat be deciding who gets care and who doesn't! I read excerpts from Patricia Balsom's Diary in The Independent recently. She was only 57 and suffering from two forms of cancer. Fifty-seven is young in this day and age.....yet under the NHS rules, she didn't qualify for treatment because of the second diagnosis. She's dead now. Read it and weep. http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/b...cle1988136.ece

[pendy]

We have always run the NHS on student nurse labour. You only need a couple of fully qualified nurses on the average ward, the rest can be students at 1st, 2nd or 3rd year. When trained, the majority will almost certainly not get jobs where they trained, because the jobs just aren't there.

The NHS does some things superbly well. Emergency care is second to none, as I can vouch, having recently ended up in Resus with a severe asthma attack and being pulled round by two doctors and three nurses. The trouble is that the NHS was set up to provide basic medical care, based on the use that people made of the existing services at the time it was set up. Of course, what nobody thought about was that if something is free, you will certainly have it, whereas if you had to pay for it you might think twice. That obviously doesn't apply to life-threatening conditions, but certainly to the odd twinge that people would put up with if it cost them to put it right. Add to that the fact that medical science can now treat conditions which were previously invariably fatal, and you have the perfect recipe for overload.

[WillowTheWhisp]

I was typing a reply to this when suddenly it all disappeared.

I can't be bothered typing it all again so I'll just say that I do hope that you get the treatment that you need as soon as possible and they can find out what is causing your problem and do something about it Cyfr.

[lettie]

Pendy is absolutely right, a free, basic service was meant to be provided to all but science has moved on and people's expectations have become higher. People are living longer and this means that they are using services for longer. The fact that we have a much older population is a clear indication that the NHS (both hospital and community care and health promotion) has worked.

Fewer people die from infectious diseases, we have good vaccination programmes and better disease treatments than we had pre- NHS.

Infant and maternal mortality rates are significantly lower than pre-NHS figures, more mothers and babies are surviving pregnancy and childbirth - yes... pregnancy can kill you. However, more women are now getting pregnant who could not (or were advised not to) previously get pregnant eg, people with cardiac problems, diabetes and older ladies. This creates multiple problems for the patient and the midwives/doctors. Multiple births are now higher due to assisted conceptions and this creates yet more problems of extremely premature babies who are at risk of respiratory problems and infections.

We have goodness knows how many immigrants coming to this country on a yearly basis, both legally and illegally....Again, they sometimes require healthcare and are yet another drain on the system. This government has vastly exaggerated how many extra nurses are practicing in this country. When you check out the NMC website, which contains details of every registered nurse, midwife, public health nurse in this country, it is nowhere near the figure that the government are quoting.

I could argue the toss forever on this one, but the fact is that the NHS is a bottomless pit where money is concerned. It is impossible to fund everything that people think that they need. With every successive change of government and every change that the government decides upon, things get more expensive and people want more.... for example, free IVF treatment, corrective operations for cosmetic treatment etc.

I am glad that we have an NHS and for the most part, I feel that we do a damned good job under increasingly difficult circumstances. I certainly know thousands of people who would have died if it had not been for those services. I can see the day when the NHS will go private, it has already started to happen. You can see the trends towards private care when you look at information on PCTs and Foundation Trusts. When things go private, people in this country will be in for a shock but I reckon that it is being done with stealth and at such a slow pace that the powers that be are hoping that nobody notices.

Patricia Hewitt, the Health Minister may sit in her ivory tower and tell joe public that everything in the NHS is being improved but just remember...... This woman has no health background, she was a social worker... What do most social workers know about the NHS? Nothing...

[WillowTheWhisp]

There are some things I don't really feel can be justified on the NHS. If something is unnecessary yet a person wants it in order to feel better about themselves (ie cosmetic surgery) is that or should that be available on the NHS when other people are going without life saving treatments?

Then there are drug addicts who can't pay for private treatment and if they get NHS treatment it stops them being a further burden so is that good or bad?

Of course we are probaby all selfish anyway and want treatment for ourselves and our loved ones. I know I am. We can't afford private treatment. Maybe when I'm older and my kids are grown up and married then I won't worry about myself so much or feel the need to be here for them. I suppose I'm the old wrinkley someone referred to as probably not being so deserving of treatment as a younger person like Cyfr who still has their whole life in front of them but I think more of being here for my children at present when they are only 12 and 15. They lost they're Dad when they were only 7 and 10.

Perhaps private health care will be easier for those who are able to take out medical insurance cover whilst still young and healthy but some of us are past it and if we already have ailments the medical insurance won't cover that. That will be OK so long as they pay out and don't go defunct like some private pension schemes have.

[bullseyebarb]

Originally Posted by lettie

. I can see the day when the NHS will go private, it has already started to happen. You can see the trends towards private care when you look at information on PCTs and Foundation Trusts. When things go private, people in this country will be in for a shock but I reckon that it is being done with stealth and at such a slow pace that the powers that be are hoping that nobody notices....

I agree.....and there will be some cultural resistance to it. However, it is already happening in Canada to some degree because people there are fed up with the limitations of their NHS and are now willing to consider at least partial privatization. Canadian doctors have been coming to America for years to practice medicine - and patients cross our border for treatment frequently because of long waits in Canada. Read the following interview with Dr. David Gratzer recently - author of several books on the subject. He's a Canadian doctor who came to the States. He thinks Americans are over-insured when it comes to healthcare. I couldn't agree with him more. As a person who has never over-insured in this regard, I can tell you that the free market works well. More and more doctors here are going completely private......as in not accepting insurance payments at all. It is expensive for them to do the paperwork and insurance companies infringe upon their relationship with the patient. You would perhaps be surprised to find how much less doctors charge when you pay them directly. Even doctors who do accept insurance will always give you a discount if you pay cash. Often a very substantial one. I like dealing one on one with my physicians. www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25489

[Ianto.W.]

Willowthewhisp That will be OK so long as they pay out and don't go defunct like some private pension schemes have.

Good point, the NHS we have will do very nicely for yours truly, it may have it's drawbacks but it will hopefully not go the way of the 'private' pensions, just remember 'our' health service is overseen by those who do not rely on it for treatment.