We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
£25 to see the Doctor?
Comments
-
Where costs impact death rates is thru the day of the week you are injured and if you need surgery/intensive care. As death rates are much higher at WE when resources are low than during the week
No different to many "leading" health systems for elective surgery either."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
I recall being told by my Gran of the pre-NHS era. They were poor. Not only did they resist going to the GP because of the cost, often they became worse before they eventually went. If my Grandfather needed the GP they had to pay because he was the breadwinner. Their child had an degenerative condition meaning they had to give that child priority over the child's brother. When one of them needed to go to the GP the whole family suffered though having less food.
I for one do not want such obscenities repeated although it will probably not bother Cameron a jot.
Yes but the pre-NHS era was a time when you had to self fund all health treatment, not just pay a small access charge whilst the government picked up the vast majority of the costs so your comparison isn't really valid to my mind. What is valid is the fact that almost every developer country in the world manages to run a health care system which involves a mixture of public and private provision and which requires users to pay some charges themselves (often recoverable later). Many of these systems produce better healthcare outcomes than the NHS does.
Whenever anyone suggests reforming the NHS in any way it sparks a load of scaremongering about how we'll all be dying in the streets whilst rich businessmen make huge profits at the expense of our life expectancy. There doesn't really seem to be a whole lot of evidence to support such scaremongering given that many other countries have better healthcare than we do using systems which are precisely what people in this country seem to be terrified of.
I don't think there would be much harm in charging people a Tenner to see a GP as long as they put a ceiling in place for how much you could be charged in any one year to say £50 and it might remove some of the strain on the NHS leading to better health care outcomes for everyone.0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »I don't think there would be much harm in charging people a Tenner to see a GP as long as they put a ceiling in place for how much you could be charged in any one year to say £50 and it might remove some of the strain on the NHS leading to better health care outcomes for everyone.
And as long as it applies to everybody and not just those who work as so many other charges do.0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »I don't think there would be much harm in charging people a Tenner to see a GP as long as they put a ceiling in place for how much you could be charged in any one year to say £50 and it might remove some of the strain on the NHS leading to better health care outcomes for everyone.
I think £10 seems much more reasonable.
I would want the GP to actually look at me and not stare at their computer so much though!:mad:0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »Many of these systems produce better healthcare outcomes than the NHS does.
many other countries have better healthcare than we do using systems which are precisely what people in this country seem to be terrified of.
Depends how you are measuring and what you are measuring.
Better results as a whole or better results for those that can access the widest choice.
There is already a private service available for those who choose to pay in this country so arguably we do have the choice and the best of both worlds."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
StevenMarks wrote: »And as long as it applies to everybody and not just those who work as so many other charges do.
Yes it would be completely pointless if anyone was exempt as the exemptions would no doubt apply to all the sorts of people who would fail to turn up or who go to the doctor because they fancy a chat.0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »Depends how you are measuring and what you are measuring.
Better results as a whole or better results for those that can access the widest choice.
There is already a private service available for those who choose to pay in this country so arguably we do have the choice and the best of both worlds.
Things like general cancer survival rate, life expectancy, incidence of heart disease etc - there are many counties which outperform the UK in these population-wide statistics (i.e. not looking at just the healthcare outcomes for rich people) but which don't have a totally free at point of use healthcare system. This is fairly good evidence that a totally free at point of use healthcare system isn't a key requirement in securing better healthcare outcomes...0 -
There's little an old style, or new style, doctor can do in a middle of the night emergency call except phone for an ambulance. If it's an emergency - cut to the chase, cut out the middle man, and phone for an ambulance oneself.
Even this is problematic.
Last year when I first lost my sight I decided simply to get dressed ( I was naked) because nothing hurt, but I thought it would be less awful to be dressed if something did happen :eek::D.
When the sight started going repeatedly the go said to call for an ambulance if it happened put of hours. When I did this and explained the problem 99 9 said they were not a taxi service and I should make my own way to a and e. ( impossible for someone rural totally new to having no sight with no back up whatsoever ever...too far by far for a taxi, and no way to find a taxi number really)
An out of hours doctor making house calls or at a local community hospital not the nearest city ( we are in a rural area) would have made a big difference.0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »Yes it would be completely pointless if anyone was exempt as the exemptions would no doubt apply to all the sorts of people who would fail to turn up or who go to the doctor because they fancy a chat.
Without exemptions how would those in genuine financial need be able to see a GP?"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »Without exemptions how would those in genuine financial need be able to see a GP?
I expect they would have to use the money they receive in benefits. That might result in them having to go without something else but if you're going to pay people benefits and let them control how that money is spent then it is up to the recipient to decide how they value their trip to the doctor against other priorities like having a phone or a tv.
In reality I expect that in most countries that charge access fees for healthcare that people who are genuinely poor can reclaim the costs retrospectively or don't have to pay. There must be some way they manage not to kill everyone in their country by stopping them from seeing the doctor otherwise they would have a worse healthcare system not a better one.
I'm also not sure I actually believe that anyone in this country who is claiming the benefits they are entitled to couldn't afford a tenner to see the doctor five times a year anyway.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards