New Year, NHS rationing, should drunks be charged for admissions?

treliac

ben500 wrote: »

Last time I looked we had a national health service catering to the nation not just a select few.

Drunkeness seems rather unique to me, in it's capacity to cost the NHS a small fortune, whilst not actually (questionably) being an illness!

kabayiri

I understand where vivatifosi is coming from.

We have to move to a situation where we appreciate and understand the real cost of everything we use.

A friend works for the local authority in noise pollution. They have a case where a guy aimed his stereo speakers at neighbouring houses, and went away for Christmas. Basically behaving like a total t*sser.

Council workload? 2 to 3 officers involved, locksmith costs to break in, JP to sign the order.

Resulting fine for the guy? About 400 quid. How on earth does that cover the real cost of the exercise.

jojo1964

treliac wrote: »

Drunkeness seems rather unique to me, in it's capacity to cost the NHS a small fortune, whilst not actually (questionably) being an illness!

Alcoholism is classed as an illness, and is treated (unfairly) alongside illnesses such as cancer.

Graham_Devon

ben500 wrote: »

Last time I looked we had a national health service catering to the nation not just a select few.

There is the problem though that the nation does not get cared for in the way they should, BECAUSE of these select few jamming up the services.

Spend a friday or saturday night in A&E. It's an eye opener. You may want a spitguard and a bodyguard.

zygurat789

abaxas wrote: »

No,

Old people with equity in their homes should pay for it.

Old people such as you suggest have little "money" those with the money are young and single and, by all accounts, tend to binge drink. Why shouldn't they pay?

kabayiri

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Spend a friday or saturday night in A&E. It's an eye opener. You may want a spitguard and a bodyguard.

Do we really want a society like this though?

Personally, not one bit.

As someone who had to pay a lot of money for medical drugs in the past, I can tell you that when you have to fork out big time you really do appreciate the investment you are making.

jojo1964

zygurat789 wrote: »

Old people such as you suggest have little "money" those with the money are young and single and, by all accounts, tend to binge drink. Why shouldn't they pay?

Thats too much of a generalisation, there are many elderly with plenty of money, as well as many young people with very little, but i dont think any one group should be singled out for tax increases (except bankers)

zygurat789

No one mentioned prescription charges. If you have a long term or permanent condition ie asthma then you may need several prescriptions, through no fault of your own, and this costs plenty whereas binge drinkers and heavy smokers get treated totally free for self-inflicted conditions. Can this be right, fair or equitable?

zygurat789

jojo1964 wrote: »

Thats too much of a generalisation, there are many elderly with plenty of money, as well as many young people with very little, but i dont think any one group should be singled out for tax increases (except bankers)

My point entirely.

zygurat789

Right lets try and put this right.
Can anyone find any % of NHS employees who actually see the patients as opposed to admin and managers and similar figures for industry/commerce in general or any large commercial organisation individually.
That is where most of the efficiency savings will have to come from.