Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ive been furious with how bad our NHS has been performing over the years, so ive started reading up on the issue, and one thing that confuses me is the amount of opposition to the idea of reforms. More information on reforms can be read here.

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Aboutus/Features/DH_122686

The Nurses just passed a vote of no confidence in Andrew Lansley, and I am left wondering whats next in the chain. Why do you think the reforms are being so heavily resisted?

Im not happy with how the system is at all, it makes me furious. The average NHS worker has 4 times more time off sick than other areas of the public sector, foreign men have had gender reassignment done, tatoos are being removed, boob jobs for dole scum.. the fething works. I dont like the current system at all, so much so that Im starting to wish we had a system more like in the US.

Where do you see the NHS in five years time? Are we REALLY on a path to privatised medicine? Or is this just media scaremongering?

I can't really understand where the nurses are coming from on this. Surely they more than anyone should understand the need for reform? The NHS as it stands now is simply not sustainable, its a funding black hole. There needs to be a serious shake-up of the management and bureaucracy that surrounds it, not to mention some of the loony decisions that have been taken recently.

Take the Queen Alexandra hospital in Southampton, for example. Recently built using a Private Finance Initiative, it was revealed on South Today yesterday that the NHS must pay back something like £43 million per year in a sort of 'mortgage' and that money goes straight to an offshore holding company in Guernsey that pays little or no tax. Absolute nuts.

Wait I thought socialized medicine was perfect? Thats what Obama keeps telling me.

Yet they just stopped doing MRIs for Medicare patients over 70 unless its an emergency situation. Thankfully Medicare Advantage takes care of that-oh wait that was just killed off too. Oh well, who needs seniors anyway. Good thing that death panel thing was just Republican nonsense and seniors weren't going to get hit.

mattyrm wrote:Are we REALLY on a path to privatised medicine?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Yeah well thats my point, why arent they fully behind it? My best mates wife is a nurse, and she said they have as many supervisors and managers as they do nurses!

She also is fully behind reforms, which make me cynically believe that this is simply politics and people who support the labour party are not behind this simply because the party that they support do not happen to be in charge.

At the end of the day, the amount of money we have thrown at this issue is ridiculous, and the amount of money some of these "managers" are earning truly beggars belief.

The system aint working.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazz, Biccat, Its one of the few things that I agree with American republicans on, and I can find very few British people who think like I do.

In a nutshell, I will always have money for private healthcare, I dont even earn THAT much, but the point is, any adult human should have the fething brains to pay for their healthcare before they buy Iphones or beer or cars etc, and I know I would always have cover.

If it stops me paying for scroungers boob jobs, or Romanian immigrants cocks to be removed, then I am all for scrapping the NHS and going private like in the states.

I would go private already, but our government already charge me for the NHS and ive got no say in the matter, and im not paying for both.

If they would stop making me pay as much tax/NI, i would happily pay for BUPA.

Im socially liberal but I have that much in common with American right wingers, I wish the govenrment would leave me the feth alone frankly. I dont want their dole money, I dont phone the police, I dont need the fire department and I dont like paying tax because a percentage of it goes to doleys, immigrants, lazy no good fethers.

I would be more than happy to give up the right to all government services and take my chances if they would take 20% less tax off me. I think iots pathetic the way everyone in this country wants the government to hold their fething hands all the time frankly.

mattyrm wrote:Yeah well thats my point, why arent they fully behind it? My best mates wife is a nurse, and she said they have as many supervisors and managers as they do nurses!

She also is fully behind reforms, which make me cynically believe that this is simply politics and people who support the labour party are not behind this simply because the party that they support do not happen to be in charge.

At the end of the day, the amount of money we have thrown at this issue is ridiculous, and the amount of money some of these "managers" are earning truly beggars belief.

The system aint working.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazz, Biccat, Its one of the few things that I agree with American republicans on, and I can find very few British people who think like I do.

In a nutshell, I will always have money for private healthcare, I dont even earn THAT much, but the point is, any adult human should have the fething brains to pay for their healthcare before they buy Iphones or beer or cars etc, and I know I would always have cover.

If it stops me paying for scroungers boob jobs, or Romanian immigrants cocks to be removed, then I am all for scrapping the NHS and going private like in the states.

I would go private already, but our government already charge me for the NHS and ive got no say in the matter, and im not paying for both.

If they would stop making me pay as much tax/NI, i would happily pay for BUPA.

Im socially liberal but I have that much in common with American right wingers, I wish the govenrment would leave me the feth alone frankly. I dont want their dole money, I dont phone the police, I dont need the fire department and I dont like paying tax because a percentage of it goes to doleys, immigrants, lazy no good fethers.

I would be more than happy to give up the right to all government services and take my chances if they would take 20% less tax off me. I think iots pathetic the way everyone in this country wants the government to hold their fething hands all the time frankly.

Why not still have public health care but you only receive the benefits if it's a life threatening illness/injury and make stuff like vanity privatized.

I have family members in the NHS who get to see the real picture and the reforms aren't what they are presented to be.

Yes reform is needed but Lansley's don't help at all. Basically it does boil down to privatising the NHS, it actively encourages private companies to take patients from what will be left of the NHS.

How are private companies ever going to compete with a government run NHS, they need to make a profit. We need tidy up the NHS and run it like a profit making company but not let private companies make money from our taxes.

The private companies working for the NHS are bad enough already. They charge far more than they should and no one queries it, by letting them take over the medical side it will just get worse.

Currently the company that supplies lightbulbss to NHS facilities sells them at £10 a bulb and no one has any problems. Allowing this across the whole NHS is crazy.

Another issue is all the people that will lose thier jobs. Since huge parts of the NHS will be gone the redundancy cost on the government will be huge.

"I dont like the current system at all, so much so that Im starting to wish we had a system more like in the US."

No you don't, trust me. It's bankrupting us, people end up not paying and the government has to cover it anyway. Any USA resident can tell you the only thing worse than a doctor bill is a lawyer bill.

"I dont want their dole money, I dont phone the police, I dont need the fire department and I dont like paying tax because a percentage of it goes to doleys, immigrants, lazy no good fethers."

The part about the police is and fire department is silly. I'll assume it's a joke or something. I'll ask you to take a look at how much money is actually spent on immigrants and such, and how much is wasted on other things.

Cheesecat wrote:

Why not still have public health care but you only receive the benefits if it's a life threatening illness/injury and make stuff like vanity privatized.

They have cut down quite a lot on managers (the offices above where mine used to be were almost emptied from about 10 managers to about 5).

I agree that a lot of treatment probably should not be done entirely on the NHS (boob jobs - other than for reconstruction after cancer/accidents/etc, gender change, etc).

mattyrm wrote:Ergo, you say "If i dont get my tatoo removed/boobs bigger/cock removed/turned into a man i will kill myself because im depressed"

Jobs done.

That's because you've got a system where the procedures 'covered' by NHS are based on political decisions based on political realities, not on whether it is cost-effective or whether it makes sense to cover the procedures. As long as you have a social welfare based health system, political concerns are going to dominate. If politician X can get group Y to vote for him by supporting the governmente providing Z, he's probably going to do so. Eventually, it will get passed.

If people actually have to pay for the health care they're demanding, they won't ask for nonsensical or cost-inefficient medical procedures.

Edit: I put quotes around "covered" because I'm not sure if there are private physicians available in the UK who will provide services that the NHS refuses.

Frazzled wrote:Wait I thought socialized medicine was perfect? ...

To be fair to the NHS we spend less than half what the USA does on medical care per capita.

biccat wrote:That's because you've got a system where the procedures 'covered' by NHS are based on political decisions based on political realities, not on whether it is cost-effective or whether it makes sense to cover the procedures. As long as you have a social welfare based health system, political concerns are going to dominate. If politician X can get group Y to vote for him by supporting the governmente providing Z, he's probably going to do so. Eventually, it will get passed.

NICE are generally quite good at determining cost effective medical care.

SilverMK2 wrote:

biccat wrote:That's because you've got a system where the procedures 'covered' by NHS are based on political decisions based on political realities, not on whether it is cost-effective or whether it makes sense to cover the procedures. As long as you have a social welfare based health system, political concerns are going to dominate. If politician X can get group Y to vote for him by supporting the governmente providing Z, he's probably going to do so. Eventually, it will get passed.

NICE are generally quite good at determining cost effective medical care.

What is NICE?

biccat wrote:What is NICE?

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, or "NICE".

NICE is an independent organisation responsible for providing national guidance on promoting good health and preventing and treating ill health.

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Ergo, you say "If i dont get my tatoo removed/boobs bigger/cock removed/turned into a man i will kill myself because im depressed"

Jobs done.

That's because you've got a system where the procedures 'covered' by NHS are based on political decisions based on political realities, not on whether it is cost-effective or whether it makes sense to cover the procedures. As long as you have a social welfare based health system, political concerns are going to dominate. If politician X can get group Y to vote for him by supporting the governmente providing Z, he's probably going to do so. Eventually, it will get passed.

If people actually have to pay for the health care they're demanding, they won't ask for nonsensical or cost-inefficient medical procedures.

Edit: I put quotes around "covered" because I'm not sure if there are private physicians available in the UK who will provide services that the NHS refuses.

And is this any better or worse then economic decisions based on profit made by private corporations

The NHS does need reform , but balanced reform. There needs to be tighter control on what the money is spent on. Are there too many managers, if there are them they need to be got rid of. Are the medical company's shafting the NHS with costs? I would imagine that's likely to be a whoping 99.9999% certainty. What about general supplies, same again.

One of the things they could also clamp down on are "NHS tourists". People who come here to have operations. If you a non UK visitor you should only be treated for unforceen emergancies, not something you had before you arrived.

Trouble is none of the parties have ever been honest when it comes to what they doing with the NHS, it's always smoke and mirrors.

Might be controversial to say it wolf, but do you not think that fertility treatment shouldnt be paid for either?

I mean, maybe we could subsidise a percentage or something, but i really feel its not important enough to spend what we do on it, and now we are getting 48 year old women qualifying for free treatment!

youbedead wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Ergo, you say "If i dont get my tatoo removed/boobs bigger/cock removed/turned into a man i will kill myself because im depressed"

Jobs done.

That's because you've got a system where the procedures 'covered' by NHS are based on political decisions based on political realities, not on whether it is cost-effective or whether it makes sense to cover the procedures. As long as you have a social welfare based health system, political concerns are going to dominate. If politician X can get group Y to vote for him by supporting the governmente providing Z, he's probably going to do so. Eventually, it will get passed.

If people actually have to pay for the health care they're demanding, they won't ask for nonsensical or cost-inefficient medical procedures.

Edit: I put quotes around "covered" because I'm not sure if there are private physicians available in the UK who will provide services that the NHS refuses.

And is this any better or worse then economic decisions based on profit made by private corporations

I'm not sure what "economic decisions" you're talking about that would be made by private corporations. In a privatized system, an individual has to pay for his or her individual health care. They can buy insurance based on their perceived risk of incurring health care expenses beyond their ability to pay, but that isn't a decision made by a corporation.

So...it would be better.

biccat wrote:I'm not sure what "economic decisions" you're talking about that would be made by private corporations. In a privatized system, an individual has to pay for his or her individual health care. They can buy insurance based on their perceived risk of incurring health care expenses beyond their ability to pay, but that isn't a decision made by a corporation.

So...it would be better.

My understanding is that insurance companies hold vast power over who is and is not insured. Even relatively minor illnesses can discount you from getting certain types of insurance, or jack up the price to the point that most people would struggle to pay the premiums.

4M2A wrote:I have family members in the NHS who get to see the real picture and the reforms aren't what they are presented to be.

Yes reform is needed but Lansley's don't help at all. Basically it does boil down to privatising the NHS, it actively encourages private companies to take patients from what will be left of the NHS.

How are private companies ever going to compete with a government run NHS, they need to make a profit. We need tidy up the NHS and run it like a profit making company but not let private companies make money from our taxes.

The private companies working for the NHS are bad enough already. They charge far more than they should and no one queries it, by letting them take over the medical side it will just get worse.

Currently the company that supplies lightbulbss to NHS facilities sells them at £10 a bulb and no one has any problems. Allowing this across the whole NHS is crazy.

Another issue is all the people that will lose thier jobs. Since huge parts of the NHS will be gone the redundancy cost on the government will be huge.

This. (mostly)

I work for the NHS (when im back from Uni), as does my mum, and my sister has just started a nursing course at uni.
ive worked at 2 hospitals (run by the same trust) for about 5 years now and one thing ive seen ove that time period is that the NHS IS being told to run as if it is a business. However, all this has done is introduce 'Business Managers' and 'Assisstant Business Managers' to EVERY department. They are the ones in charge of the budget for each depratment and all they do is spend all day, every day, in pointless meetings going over random statistics to prove that the money their department is spending is worth it. SO money is being wasted on wages, to prove the money being spent is spent worthwhile-y
My mum is a Team Leader for MDT (multi-disciplinary team - if you dont know what that is, basically, if you have/are suspected of having cancer, its this team that makes sure you are seen and treated and follows your progress), and a ridiculous amount of her time is wasted in meetings, or preparing for meetings, or writing the outcomes from meetings.....etc. etc. etc. And most of the other people in these meetings are 'managers' who spend their entire day/week/year doing this. It has to stop!

My other major quible with this system at the moment is that for every meeting, every person there has to have as paper copy of whatever the meeting is about, so thousands and thousands of copies of THE SAME THING are printed off every day, eevn though all the information is on the computer systems, which (trust me, i worked in IT last year) there are no shortage of computers to access this.

Finally, every private company that is employed by the NHS takes the absolute and pretty much charges what they want with no argument whatsoever (as shown by the quote above, thank you 4M2A). This ranges from everything to lightbulbs, to paper, desks, chairs and (i assume) all the clinical equippment being used as well, its fething stupid! There is no way letting them take control would in any way help matters IMO.

theres plenty of other problems as well, but these are a couple of things that i have personal experience of and always, without fail, get my blood boiling (well, that and Consultants taking home 6 figure salaries and then moaning when they have 17 patients to see instead of 16!!)

Private Finance Initiative costs have escalated rapidly in the past few years.

PFI was a Gordon Brown idea.

Kilkrazy wrote:Private Finance Initiative costs have escalated rapidly in the past few years.

PFI was a Gordon Brown idea.

*sigh*...why am i not surprised?

Ok, so Matty wants to fund his health care and get his money back from the Government. It's an interesting idea that's for certain. Matty strikes me as the type of bloke who dosen't worry about the niceties of health care, so a basic package would probably be ok for him. Having seen my fathers own attempts (an ex marine for the 60's) at home treatments, I can't really see him being around for too long

Anyway in 2003 I got laid off from a job which came with Bupa cover. I enquired about what it would cost to carry it on myself and if I remember correctly it was around £70 per month. So as I was not working I gave it a miss. I've just been on the Bupa site to get an idea of what it cost's nowadays for basic cover. No price, the sneaky gits, but it did show what wasn't covered under the basic package:

Ageing, menopause and puberty

AIDS / HIV‡

Allergies or allergic disorders

Birth control, conception, sexual problems and sex changes‡

Chronic conditions‡

Complications from excluded or restricted conditions / treatment

Contamination, wars and riots

Convalescence, rehabilitation and general nursing care‡

Cosmetic, reconstructive or weight loss treatment‡

Deafness

Dental / oral treatment (such as fillings, gum disease, jaw shrinkage etc)‡

Dialysis‡

Drugs and dressings for out-patient or take-home use‡

Experimental drugs and treatment‡

Treatment to correct eyesight (eg long or short sight)‡

HRT and bone densitometry‡

Intensive care

Learning difficulties, behavioural and developmental problems

Overseas treatment and repatriation

Physical aids and devices‡

Pre-existing or special conditions

Pregnancy and childbirth‡

Screening, monitoring and preventive treatment

Sleep problems and disorders

Speech disorders‡

Telephone consultations

Temporary relief of symptoms‡

Unrecognised providers or facilities

Obviously some of these Matty probably dosen't need to worry about .

I just checked some payslips and I'm paying £119 in NI a month. £119, which covers me for everything, including dentist, eyes and going back and having treatment for the same condition if need be. Ok, there could be delays for some of these treatments, but and it's a big BUT, I don't have to worry about it not being "covered".

Don't get me wrong, the NHS does need to be grabbed by the scruff of the neck and given a good shake, but for the right reasons and the right results.

mattyrm wrote:Ive been furious with how bad our NHS has been performing over the years, so ive started reading up on the issue, and one thing that confuses me is the amount of opposition to the idea of reforms. More information on reforms can be read here.

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Aboutus/Features/DH_122686

The Nurses just passed a vote of no confidence in Andrew Lansley, and I am left wondering whats next in the chain. Why do you think the reforms are being so heavily resisted?

Im not happy with how the system is at all, it makes me furious. The average NHS worker has 4 times more time off sick than other areas of the public sector, foreign men have had gender reassignment done, tatoos are being removed, boob jobs for dole scum.. the fething works. I dont like the current system at all, so much so that Im starting to wish we had a system more like in the US.

Where do you see the NHS in five years time? Are we REALLY on a path to privatised medicine? Or is this just media scaremongering?

Nope, just your scaremongering. The NHS needs reform. It's getting reform. Some people are naturally opposed to this because historically turkeys don't vote in favour of christmas.


Next!

There has been a number of NHS reforms in the past 30 years. I am slightly cynical as to why this latest one should succeed where all the others have supposedly failed.

For an example, the GP purchasing scheme sounds similar to the GP fundholder scheme of the 1980s.

SilverMK2 wrote:

biccat wrote:I'm not sure what "economic decisions" you're talking about that would be made by private corporations. In a privatized system, an individual has to pay for his or her individual health care. They can buy insurance based on their perceived risk of incurring health care expenses beyond their ability to pay, but that isn't a decision made by a corporation.

So...it would be better.

My understanding is that insurance companies hold vast power over who is and is not insured. Even relatively minor illnesses can discount you from getting certain types of insurance, or jack up the price to the point that most people would struggle to pay the premiums.

I don't understand this preoccupation with the idea that everyone deserves to have top-of-the-line health care at the expense of taxpayers.

If you can't afford health insurance, you can either pay for your health care yourself, deal with the injury/illness, or appeal to charity. I don't see why I have to be forced to pay for your medical treatment.

We do.

Get it watched, let the hate flow through you. UK only though, I think...

Channel 4: Dispatches

Nationalized health care makes a great deal of sense. People's health and lives are higher priority than corporate profits.

Just like how we don't have a "for profit" military, police, or fire departments (anymore) in the US. Those things are too important for their effective and efficient provision to be second-priority behind profits.

As KilKrazy pointed out, the UK spends less than half of what the US does per capita on healthcare. This is rather strong evidence against privatization being more efficient or cost effective.

Matty, it is rather ironic for you to declare your independence from and lack of need for the government, when it gave you all the job training and pay which put you in the beneficial economic situation you're in. You benefitted from the Marines. You got a lot more out of the system than you've put in, financially. It's like the Libertarians here who say "I don't need the government. You have no right to my tax money." As if totally ignorant to the fact that without publicly-provided roads, police, fire departments, emergency services, and the entire structure of our legal system, they wouldn't be able to make the money that they do. No man is an island.