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!
Would a mixed NHS / Private model work?
Comments
-
Why is it bad if it makes healthcare better for all?
Surely it's better for everyone to get better healthcare even if that means that rich people get more of the additional benefit than poor people. Speaking as someone who was mortally ill I would rather be treated than not, even if someone else gets something better than me.
When the SHTF all you really care about is getting well again, not whether the bloke in the bed next to you is having caviar while you eat bread and butter.
But it doesn't make it better for all, it only makes it better for those who can afford to pay.0 -
JencParker wrote: »But it doesn't make it better for all, it only makes it better for those who can afford to pay.
so you are against a situation that would mean no-one being worse off but some are better off?
aren't you personally better off than some people: are you against that too?0 -
I think a private contribution is needed. £25 for a GP appointment is too much, it needs to be affordable so if someone is genuinely ill they will pay it, but not so high it stops people seeking medical advice
I've said for a while that GP appointments should be charged at the rate of a current prescription, with any prescription cost then removed if treatment is required. That may make people that are not that ill think twice before going, after all if people go now and are genuinely ill, they will expect to pay a prescription charge anyway, so it makes no odds
The NHS is a great idea, but people will always abuse freebies. I think that's a big part of the problem with the UK, yes we have great facilities, welfare, healthcare etc... but at the same time it creates too much abuse and expectation from many. How many people really look after themselves? Those that do, and have to pay to do so, are probably less of a burden on the NHS, yet still pay for it, whilst those that don't so much are probably those in the docs week in, week out
The NHS is not free!
It does not matter what the charge is it will either be so trivial so that it not justify the administrative cost of collecting it or it will deter someone. Those who advocate charging may find £20 to be no more than they spend on a round of drinks, but to some people it will make the difference between heating their house that week and not.
If you are saying those above average earnings should pay maybe that might be worth considering. But I would never support a system where genuinely poor people were required to pay to see a GP.
The Australian system as Generali described it seems reasonably well thought out and means that only those in work and able to afford to pay are subject to such a regime. A blanket charge is not the answer.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
so you are against a situation that would mean no-one being worse off but some are better off?
aren't you personally better off than some people: are you against that too?
You're making an unfounded assumption that no one would be worse off - of course some will be worse off - if they can't afford the treatments they will go without. This has already been seen with dental care.0 -
In_For_A_Penny wrote: »I'm afraid it doesn't quite work like that.
The same numbers of patients need seen by the same number of doctors. In the time that a patient is being seen in a private clinic, that consultant specialist is not available to see patients on the NHS.
It might be argued that private clinics are undertaken in a consultants "free-time". Very often that is not the case and they have merely delegated work to a more junior colleague in their absence.
Actually, it works exactly like that.
By going private, I am adding extra cash into the Australian health system which allows for more operations to be carried out.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »I must point out, I'd rather see the NHS too, it can be a very good system. However, theres no point burying heads in sands here. It's unaffordable now and some could describe it as in crisis.
I think that that is what they want you to think. If we were paying significantly more than other nations I might agree with you but we are not. If we adopted a few efficiencies the NHS would cost about the same as the Aus system. If we spent a little more to match say France we could probably achieve better outcomes. We can do either or a combination.
More rampant changes based on the illusion that the NHS is flawed is not what we need. I fully support measures that save money like recovering crutches, telling people they are not A&E cases, even reforming the prescription system. But the principle of free universal care at the point of use is worth fighting for.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
JencParker wrote: »You're making an unfounded assumption that no one would be worse off - of course some will be worse off - if they can't afford the treatments they will go without. This has already been seen with dental care.
that wasn't what you said
better to say what you mean in the first place0 -
PasturesNew wrote: »
Never heard of her. A brief Google suggests I don't particularly want to.
No idea how she managed to wangle her NHS boob job, but very few people do.
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/breast-implants/Pages/Introduction.aspxIt's estimated more than 30,000 such procedures are carried out in the UK every year. Most of these are carried out privately, with fewer than 4,500 operations to fit breast implants carried out on the NHS during 2012-13.
Why are breast implants used?
Breast implants can be used for two purposes:
reconstructive – to reconstruct the breast mound after a mastectomy (the surgical removal of the breast, often used to treat breast cancer)
cosmetic – to enhance the size and shape of the breast
Generally, breast implants used for purely cosmetic reasons are not available on the NHS and need to be paid for privately.
So that's less than 1/6 of boob jobs are on the NHS, and most of those are reconstructive.
Also http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/breast-reduction/Pages/Introduction.aspxIf breast reduction is done to improve appearance rather than for health reasons, it is not normally available on the NHS. Instead, you will need to pay for private treatment.
You may be considered for a breast reduction operation on the NHS if you have physical discomfort from having large breasts, such as:
backache
neck pain
skin irritation
poor posture
excessive sweating, rashes and skin infections under the breasts
grooves on the shoulders from bra straps
an inability to exercise or take part in sportsDo you know anyone who's bereaved? Point them to https://www.AtaLoss.org which does for bereavement support what MSE does for financial services, providing links to support organisations relevant to the circumstances of the loss & the local area. (Link permitted by forum team)
Tyre performance in the wet deteriorates rapidly below about 3mm tread - change yours when they get dangerous, not just when they are nearly illegal (1.6mm).
Oh, and wear your seatbelt. My kids are only alive because they were wearing theirs when somebody else was driving in wet weather with worn tyres.
0 -
I too have heard that healthcare in Australia is very good from relatives. As I understand it is basically state funded but with some costs paid for "at cost" by individuals who are therefore "forced" to take out private insurance cover for these things. From what you say, there are some things you must pay for that cannot be insured against.
Whether it is better than the UK I do not know but the funding seems overly complex as you describe it with plenty of scope to find yourself uninsured.
You do have to have very basic health insurance but it only needs to cover ambulance costs (I've never really understood why).
The main things you pay for out of your own pocket are:
- Dental care
- Glasses
- Most diagnostic tests done outside the hospital system
- Medicines (generics are usually state subsidised)
- Physiotherapy
- Anything you elect to have done in the private system
- Alternative treatment (e.g. acupuncture, homeopathy, herbalism)
- Some forms of mental health care
My health insurance covers me for those things and also pays for me to have a single room in hospital. For a family of 4 I pay ~$250/month for that but get a tax break of ~$2,000 so I pay a net ~$2,000/year.
Lots of people don't have health insurance beyond the minimum ambulance cover and seem to get by perfectly well.0 -
Actually, it works exactly like that.
By going private, I am adding extra cash into the Australian health system which allows for more operations to be carried out.
Gen, out of interest, are there statistics that show it actually happens?Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards