How to get treatment?

Manxman_in_exile

thepurplepixie wrote: »

I never said they would be pushed to the head of the queue. I'm not sure if I can't explain this, if people can't understand or don't want to understand.

Let me give you a real example. I saw my GP about something 8 months ago, I was referred to an NHS Consultant, I was seen last week. I need treatment, who knows how long, but let us say it is 8 weeks. Now my total waiting time is 10 months. If I had paid to see the Consultant privately say a week after I saw the GP my total waiting time would have been 9 weeks. I am now in an eight week queue and probably/possibly some of the people in front of me saw the Consultant privately so by seeing him privately they avoided the 8 month wait and they don't have to go behind me and all the other people who are in the 8 week queue. Can you see that by paying their £100 or whatever they had leapfrogged over me and all the other people who waited? The only advantage is they didn't see the Consultant in clinic, in my case about 30 seconds, one look and he agreed I needed the treatment.

Fine if you want reassurance but don't push in because other people are being delayed if you have paid to get in front of them.

I certainly understand the point you are trying to make and I think almost all other posters do too.


I also understand the points of view of posters who disagree with you!


I do not think there is a "correct" answer here. It's a very complex moral/ethical/political/financial/organisational issue. Even more so when the health and possibly lives of loved ones may be at stake.


The NHS needs more funding - but I don't see people actually voting for that.


As an aside - I think this has been a remarkably well mannered and well argued debate by all contributors (apart from the one who suggested the OP was not telling the whole truth!).


Would all forum threads be the same...

lessonlearned

thepurplepixie wrote: »

You so don't get the point.

I think I do.......I’m not without a certain level of intelligence. :rotfl:

And Believe it or not I am actually in agreement with your wish to see a fair and equitable system. I think most of us want to see fairness for all.

I just think that what you want is unachievable the way things currently stand.

Manxman is right......it’s an extremely complex (and emotive) issue.

Manxman_in_exile

lessonlearned wrote: »

Thank you I know you are not being critical.

However, I think PP is seeing things as either black or white and is perhaps taking a somewhat over simplistic view. Private bad, NHS good. A bit like the famous quote from Animal Farm.

The NHS is a great socialist ideal but unfortunately it is no longer working......Did it ever work the way it was intended. I doubt it.

Yes Nye Bevan is probably spinning in his grave.......

Ultimately I guess we need some kind of private/nhs partnership. I just hope it doesn’t go the way of healthcare funding in The US, although I have a nasty feeling that is exactly what will happen.

Perhaps - yes. 30 or 40 years ago I would agree 100% with pp, but it may be an idealistic and simplistic view of a problem that is not clear cut.


however, despite spending 25 years dealing with a Byzantine(spelling?) NHS infrastructure, I'm still basically an idealistic and simplistic person.


Sometimes the simple solution is the right one. (Assuming it is the right one!).


Thank you for accepting my post in the manner I intended.

lessonlearned

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

Perhaps - yes. 30 or 40 years ago I would agree 100% with pp, but it may be an idealistic and simplistic view of a problem that is not clear cut.


however, despite spending 25 years dealing with a Byzantine(spelling?) NHS infrastructure, I'm still basically an idealistic and simplistic person.


Sometimes the simple solution is the right one. (Assuming it is the right one!).


Thank you for accepting my post in the manner I intended.

But realistically is there a “a simple solution”.

Yes the NHS is starved of resources, I think we can all agree that. But is money the whole picture..Is the money being spent wisely. I don’t think it is.

Like you say the NHS structure itself is Byzantine...your spelling is fine:rotfl:). Maybe we could start there......maybe unravel it a bit and straighten out some of the kinks.

But I’m guessing it’s a huge task that no one really wants to attempt.

seven-day-weekend

thepurplepixie wrote: »

If the chips were down I would pay for the treatment and not disadvantage other people by jumping the queue.

What if you could afford the initial consultation but not the resulting treatment? If it was one of your loved ones you would jump the queue?

[Deleted User]

I thought this thread was about bypassing an NHS doctor who wasn't taking the patient seriously, not about queue jumping.

Manxman_in_exile

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

What if you could afford the initial consultation but not the resulting treatment? If it was one of your loved ones you would jump the queue?

Not directed at me, I know, but I might have jumped the queue. I would not have been happy doing so if somebody I had "displaced" had died as a result of what I had done.


If, as a society, we don't want to fund healthcare for all fully (which we clearly have not for the last 40 years) we are were we are. Not anybody's fault but our own...

pollypenny

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

What if you could afford the initial consultation but not the resulting treatment? If it was one of your loved ones you would jump the queue?

I'm not sure that this would arise very often.

As LL said, both her husband and FIL were treated quickly because the consultant identified the urgency.

In my case, the consultant reassured me that I could go off to the USA for three months without risking bankruptcy as an existing condition would not have been covered.

I then waited nine months quite contentedly.

Manxman_in_exile

jack_pott wrote: »

I thought this thread was about bypassing an NHS doctor who wasn't taking the patient seriously, not about queue jumping.

I know. I think it was perhaps about the OP's husband not making sufficiently clear to their GP what they were suffering with. It may have been a case of failing to communicate on both sides. Some years ago, when my FiL was suffering several health problems which were not being properly coordinated by the local NHS (especially GP surgery) I said to my wife to speak to the GP practice manager about the failings. She did so in a not overly assertive way and things were resolved to everybody's satisfaction.


OP- this post is in no way intended to be a criticism of your or your husbands actions. I just happen to know how some parts of the NHS work. My wife is a public sector lawyer but was reluctant to complain about her father's care until I told her that the local surgery should do better. she spoke to them and they did do better. Not at all how it should work but unless voters want to pay more in tax it will not improve.


Nowhere soon!

gingerbread_cat

While I agree to a point with purple, I have been in this situation and effectively queue jumped. In November 2003 I had a breast lump. Went to the Gp who was worried and referred me. Had a letter saying they would send me an appointment in 18 weeks, and I could expect to wait 21 weeks in total.
I was 30, I had two young children, and I knew I was ill. I didn't want to spend the next 6 months worrying. I paid £200 to be seen at Bupa the following evening. The consultant put me at the top of his NHS list, I had a mastectomy three days later and then started treatment.
I queue jumped, and somebody will have had to wait longer I'm sure. £200 was a lot of money (paid for from Christmas savings) and I could never have paid for the treatment privately. But I would have died if I'd waited - consultant said I would have only lived 6 months without treatment. Morally it's unfair, but I also feel it's morally unfair to die and leave small children if you can help it! What we see depends on where we stand, and the experiences that shape us.