Save the Economy? SCRAP the NHS!

funguy

vivatifosi wrote: »

I've noticed there are a few NHS employees posting on this thread and I know we have a few regulars from the medical profession. Can I please ask a question of all of you:

What key points need to be addressed to make the NHS more effective, more efficient and better value for money for the tax payer?

This is not such a difficult question to answer.

1) None of the top 20-25% of earners in the NHS (and thats 1000s of employees) are clinical staff....that puts into perspective where the vast majority of "new" money invested has gone - certainly not to doctors, nurses, clinical research staff etc! So for a start, remove all non clinically essential non-clinical staff!

2) The NHS is overburdened by repeated consultations for things which do not need a medical consultation - coughs, colds, grazes, minor illness etc...there should be a nominal £5-£10 charge for a visit to your GP - this would NOT go to the GP but recycled into the central NHS pot.

3) Home visit requests for GPs, District Nurses and Ambulances are rising at an astronomical rate. Most of these requests are by people who are too lazy to get out and seek medical advice themselves or for non medical reasons at all....abuse is rife!! Therefore there should be a £30-£40 fee for visits by doctors and fines for thos who call ambulances inappropriately. Again money to be recycled into the NHS pot.

4) All patients who do not turn up to GP and hospital appointments to receive a fine which needs payed before they get another appointment.

The 4 above measures would ensure a far more efficient, lean and streamluined service for everyone! I have discussed this with several people employed in the current NHS and seems to be some of the biggest problems at present.

lostinrates

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Surely if everybodygot off their backsides and changed GPs then this would affect their funding and be an incentive? Unfortunately, many people just stick with the one they know and nothing changes.

We are in reasonable distance of two surgeries, the one that failed to refer me with my neurological condition and almost cost me my life, and the one we transfered to. They failed to accept my mother's thyroid (after thyroidectomy) was causing problems. The goitre when eventully removed, had grown down her trachea into the top of her lungs...turns out she hadn't developed asthma after all. We've run out of options!

FWIW I like my doctor at surgery two for normal things- for a start I rarely hve to go in, I tell her the problem over the phone, but I micromange details of my condition direct with consultants and the private GP who fixed me -patched me together anyway- privately and who are kind enough to find my case interesting.

All of that said, I'm still in favour of NHS . DH has mild psoarisis for which his NHStreatment is very, very good.

perplexed.com

bendix wrote: »

I find myself in the invidious position of agreeing with dervish, for once.

Like all public sector activities such as the benefits system, it was a good idea done for the right reasons but it failed to take into account one key issue - human nature.

After it started in the 1940s, doctors commented that rather than fix health issues, it created them. Bored housewives trundled up daily with imaginary complaints because - well, it was free, wasn't it, and they got attention.

I'm convinced the rise in such things as incapacity benefit payments is directly related to the NHS - it's so easy for a doctor to issue a prescription for a bad back, depression or god knows what, and so the burden on the taxpayer increases. When people had to pay for 'sicknesses', they were amazingly healthy. When it became free, the state of our national health plummetted.

For the life of me, I can't work out philosophically why an individual's health is the concern of the state - it makes no sense to me. Health is a private concern, and a matter for me to look after. Only I know what is best for me and as a rational human being, I think I can take care of my anticipated health issues (through insurance) better than a well-meaning mandarin anyday.

I'm very glad most people aren't as selfish as you. I wouldn't care if I never had to use the NHS, in fact I'd be delighted. I am glad my money helps people who would not otherwise be able to afford proper care. If you don't like the system here, I have a suggestion, move elsewhere and hope you never chance upon hard times. But do you know what? if you did I would be glad to help you out. It's a shame you wouldn't do the same for me.

Mozette

Well my mother certainly got her money's worth from the NHS, she had a heart condition necessitating several operations, then had extensive treatment for the cancer that killed her. I'm sure Dervish, you would consider that my family was from 'the lower classes'. But hey, I certainly hope I don't get my money's worth.

moggylover

dervish wrote: »

The main point should be : why should the lower classes and the poor receive FREE services and treatments when they contribute nothing towards it.

I was always told by my parents that you reap the rewards of investments - those who dont contribute should get nothing. Especially the so-called NHS tourists.

Personally I think they would all have to try VERY hard to even approach a class as low as your own:D. Lower classes indeed! Anyone would think you had a title:rolleyes:

I do, however, agree that ONLY residents of the UK or those with passport agreements that their own Country will pick up the tab for their care should receive free health care. Anyone else should have to take out travel insurance as we do to travel to their Countries.

funguy

bendix wrote: »

After it started in the 1940s, doctors commented that rather than fix health issues, it created them. Bored housewives trundled up daily with imaginary complaints because - well, it was free, wasn't it, and they got attention.

I'm convinced the rise in such things as incapacity benefit payments is directly related to the NHS - it's so easy for a doctor to issue a prescription for a bad back, depression or god knows what, and so the burden on the taxpayer increases. When people had to pay for 'sicknesses', they were amazingly healthy. When it became free, the state of our national health plummetted.

The above part of bendix's post is actually very true of what the "Free at point of use" NHS has done to the UK public....

Things that are FREE are always abused! Unfortunately a large proportion of society in general feel that they are not responsible for their own health because they can always blame the health service for their alcohol induced liver disease, gastritis and pancreatitis: their smoking for the lung cancer, oral lesions and breathing problems and their overeating for their heart attacks, diabetes and strokes!

Im not saying that they shouldnt be allowed to do any of the above but a lot of people continue to live with disregard to their health because they know the NHS will pick up the pieces at no cost to them directly. One example being the millions the NHS spends on ant-acid and reflux medication - approx 85% of the people on these are due to their lifestyle choices! Food for thought?

perplexed.com

funguy wrote: »

This is not such a difficult question to answer.

1) None of the top 20-25% of earners in the NHS (and thats 1000s of employees) are clinical staff....that puts into perspective where the vast majority of "new" money invested has gone - certainly not to doctors, nurses, clinical research staff etc! So for a start, remove all non clinically essential non-clinical staff!

2) The NHS is overburdened by repeated consultations for things which do not need a medical consultation - coughs, colds, grazes, minor illness etc...there should be a nominal £5-£10 charge for a visit to your GP - this would NOT go to the GP but recycled into the central NHS pot.

3) Home visit requests for GPs, District Nurses and Ambulances are rising at an astronomical rate. Most of these requests are by people who are too lazy to get out and seek medical advice themselves or for non medical reasons at all....abuse is rife!! Therefore there should be a £30-£40 fee for visits by doctors and fines for thos who call ambulances inappropriately. Again money to be recycled into the NHS pot.

4) All patients who do not turn up to GP and hospital appointments to receive a fine which needs payed before they get another appointment.

The 4 above measures would ensure a far more efficient, lean and streamluined service for everyone! I have discussed this with several people employed in the current NHS and seems to be some of the biggest problems at present.

Spot on funguy! Just one thing re: non-clinical posts, do not include the very important secretarial staff who directly support clinicians. If they were to go from my department everything would fall apart ( and has done in the past unfortunately ) So not across the board. Just the higher echelons and also the people who sit in government offices thinking up 'health improvement targets' and organising useless conferences about 'leadership' etc. etc.

funguy

Oh i completely agree....i said "remove all non clinically essential non-clinical staff!".....secretarial staff, support staff etc are just as essential as the clinical staff!

I really meant all those managers, management support staff, specialist resource teams and all the rubbish new posts that have sprung up over the last few years!

baileysbattlebus

funguy wrote: »

This is not such a difficult question to answer.

1) None of the top 20-25% of earners in the NHS (and thats 1000s of employees) are clinical staff....that puts into perspective where the vast majority of "new" money invested has gone - certainly not to doctors, nurses, clinical research staff etc! So for a start, remove all non clinically essential non-clinical staff!

2) The NHS is overburdened by repeated consultations for things which do not need a medical consultation - coughs, colds, grazes, minor illness etc...there should be a nominal £5-£10 charge for a visit to your GP - this would NOT go to the GP but recycled into the central NHS pot.

3) Home visit requests for GPs, District Nurses and Ambulances are rising at an astronomical rate. Most of these requests are by people who are too lazy to get out and seek medical advice themselves or for non medical reasons at all....abuse is rife!! Therefore there should be a £30-£40 fee for visits by doctors and fines for thos who call ambulances inappropriately. Again money to be recycled into the NHS pot.

4) All patients who do not turn up to GP and hospital appointments to receive a fine which needs payed before they get another appointment.

The 4 above measures would ensure a far more efficient, lean and streamluined service for everyone! I have discussed this with several people employed in the current NHS and seems to be some of the biggest problems at present.

Does this mean that we go back to pre NHS days when only those who could afford it visited a doctor?

£5 or £10 for a doctors visit might not be a lot to you, but for some people it is - and may prevent them from seeking treatment.

The same for £30 - £40 for a housecall, it would certainly make some people think twice and rightly so, but for others it would be out of their reach - not everyone could afford it.

Are you suggesting access to the health service becomes means tested??

I acknowledge some people probably abuse the system, and the system abuses some of it's patients. The elderly being neglected and not being fed is one that springs to mind.

I agree that less should be spent on admin costs and highly paid execs and more should be spent on clinical care and research - surely there would be enough in savings to prevent charges being introduced for doctors surgery visits.


Then there is the Quality and Outcome Framework which means that GP's are asking older people to call into the surgery for regular health checks and often prescribing medication even though the patients are not ill and feel reasonably well. It will mean another box gets ticked on the QOF list.

QOF is one of the main sources of potential income for GP's.

This could go some way to explaining why people see GPs' waiting rooms full of elderly people - it probably isn't because they are ill, though obviously some will be, but quite a few will have been called in for a health check. That is certainly the case in our surgery.

funguy

Well without the money from QOF, there would be no GP surgeries as thats where GP, nurse, receptionist wages partly comes from as well as building costs! It was the government's plan to get people in for pointless health checks all the time.....all the doctors were against QOF!