£25 to see the Doctor?

System

grizzly1911 wrote: »

People expect too much these days and instead of taking a reasoned approach often go into rant mode without thinking why, what if etc.

If you call a plumber to fix a dripping tap, pay £25, but it still drips, you are entitled to complain, and go on complaining until it is fixed.

But if he explained that it was a free service, he'd do his best, but you can't expect much for nothing, you would take the reasoned approach.

Mojisola

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

If you call a plumber to fix a dripping tap, pay £25, but it still drips, you are entitled to complain, and go on complaining until it is fixed.

But if he explained that it was a free service, he'd do his best, but you can't expect much for nothing, you would take the reasoned approach.

But the NHS isn't a free service - we pay for it, just not at the point of contact.

moneyistooshorttomention

Mojisola wrote: »

Paying for an appointment will change the relationship between the GP and the patient. If their GP doesn't look properly at them, rushes through an appointment, doesn't seem to listen properly or just tells them to come back again in a couple of weeks if things don't improve might lead people to moan a bit now - if that happens when they've paid upfront for the appointment, they are going to be complaining directly to the surgery.

Mojisola

You are just making so much sense again.

If someone get a service apparently "for free" then that's one thing and bad enough if they don't get a decent level of service BUT the second someone is told to pay for that service directly then they will start questioning whether they are getting "value for money" and complaining if they aren't.

The_White_Horse

only morons (and health tourists and scroungers) think the NHS is free. unfortunately it is paid for by a dwindling band of peopel called "workers" who have a large part of their salary legally stolen each month to pay for it. This group DOES NOT include public sector workers, who whilst seemingly paying tax does not realise that their contribution is utterly meaningless and they could all simply just be paid less.

I am a big fan of the NHS. I think medicine should be socialised because some people will be lucky and stay mainly healthy whereas others will, over the course of their life will become ill. that burden should be shared. However, that does not extend to paying for millions of scroungers, romanians, bulgarians, albanians, indians or anyone else who hasn't paid in. I believe medicine should be socialised - not made into a charity.

ah, whats the point, the do good lefty has ruined everything.

IronWolf

The_White_Horse wrote: »

why doesn't the govt pay doctors, chemists, pharmacists, researchers etc to design and make drugs, rather than be beholden to the likes of Glaxo etc. if the Govt actually makes drugs that work they could licence them abroad and that could pay for a large chunk of the NHS. Sort of like what the BBC does with Top Gear.

Most of the easy drugs have been found. Lots of pharma companies these days are running into trouble because they aren't discovering enough new drugs. The industry spends hundreds of billions on R&D already without many new blockbuster drugs.

It should be looked at though, the pharma industry is rife with problems over how they collect and publish clinical data too.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Or standards might rise.

If a GP is fobbing someone off it hardly matters whether the service is 'free' or costs £25 - it's not acceptable.

Why would a GP fob someone off? They get nothing from it.

Medicine isn't an exact science. Sometimes it's impossible to state a problem is X without getting further information and trying medication.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why would a GP fob someone off? They get nothing from it.

Medicine isn't an exact science. Sometimes it's impossible to state a problem is X without getting further information and trying medication.

Fobbing people off is a skill GP's develop to get rid of the patients who turn up for 'something to do'. After a while they must start finding it difficult to differentiate between the malingerers and the genuinely concerned.

What the GP gets from the fobbing off routine is not having to tell my MIL (at the doctors once a fortnight) that there's nothing wrong with her that losing 3 stone and doing some exercise wouldn't cure. It must be difficult to explain to someone there's not a thing wrong with them in a manner which doesn't put them off attending when they are genuinely ill.

I've never used my GP's complaints procedure but have explained to them before that as they see me less than once a year they should take that as a signal that I don't turn up for fun. If the 'come back in two weeks cure' worked I'd already be cured because that's how long I leave it before attempting to make an appointment anyway. I use the drop-in centre now - it shows a certain commitment to get treatment if you're willing to queue with a room full of druggies, street drinkers and misfits for 3 hours.

Pennywise

This is just the GP's being greedy again and wanting even more pay. If the appointment fees that they want to charge went straight to Govt coffers and not their pockets, I can guarantee very few GPs would want it to be brought in.

It'll never happen because the GPs would be frightened of patients no longer being doormats - if you pay for an appointment, you'll want to be seen at the right time and will want the right outcome from the appointment. GP's will never be able to cope with that kind of discipline that most other professions have to abide by. At the moment, patients can be fobbed off with the old "what do you expect when it's free" excuse. Patients won't pay for a second or third visit when the GP got the diagnosis wrong on the first.

The other ridiculous point that I don't think has been picked up on in this thread is their proposal to increase the charge for professionals etc - I think I heard £100 mentioned. Again, no hope of that working as the "professionals" would just counter-claim for their wasted time when the GP finally sees them an hour late.

Stupid idea, completely unworkable. GP union just out for a pay rise!

grizzly1911

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

If you call a plumber to fix a dripping tap, pay £25, but it still drips, you are entitled to complain, and go on complaining until it is fixed.

It is pretty simple to fix a dripping tap.

To expect it fixed within a set time-scale, with the right attitude may not be possible.

For chronic or age related complaints there may be no cure or there may be a need to learn to live with and manage the condition.

zagubov

Pennywise wrote: »

This is just the GP's being greedy again and wanting even more pay. If the appointment fees that they want to charge went straight to Govt coffers and not their pockets, I can guarantee very few GPs would want it to be brought in.

It'll never happen because the GPs would be frightened of patients no longer being doormats - if you pay for an appointment, you'll want to be seen at the right time and will want the right outcome from the appointment. GP's will never be able to cope with that kind of discipline that most other professions have to abide by. At the moment, patients can be fobbed off with the old "what do you expect when it's free" excuse. Patients won't pay for a second or third visit when the GP got the diagnosis wrong on the first.

The other ridiculous point that I don't think has been picked up on in this thread is their proposal to increase the charge for professionals etc - I think I heard £100 mentioned. Again, no hope of that working as the "professionals" would just counter-claim for their wasted time when the GP finally sees them an hour late.

Stupid idea, completely unworkable. GP union just out for a pay rise!

The med schools keeep filling up with people who want to be consultants, not GPs. You'll struggle to shift the power balance towards the patient when the GP can always find another patient but the patient struggles to find another GP who'll take them.

A lot of what GPs do is (justifiably) simply fobbing off the worried well/malingerers etc. without using up too many of the taxpayers resources along the way, so they can get on acting as gatekeepers to properly unite really sick people with the services they actually require