To be annoyed by obvious waste by nhs

trisher ideally we would give free NHS help to everyone who asked for it but it must be difficult for staff to find a way of working out who should get free treatment and who should pay. I made some suggestions but you chose not to comment on those just to pull out one part of my post. I'm sorry you find it so hard to be constructive.

I was admitted to hospital in France while on holiday there a few years ago and woke in the night to find an oriental looking doctor putting up a new drip. I speak some French so asked him what the drip was for, but could not understand his response. He did not speak English and it didn't even occur to me to ask for an interpreter. He eventually explained with a certain amount of gesturing and waving about of arms what the drip was for. I think I understood, but at the end of the day I had to take it on trust that the treatment was appropriate.
As for wastage in the NHS I worked for the |NHS for almost 10 years back in the 1980s and every year as the financial year end approached, we were told to order whatever we wanted on 'quickspend' as any money in our budgets which was left over was likely to result in budget cuts the next year. I can remember expensive pieces of equipment being bought at this time that were rarely used and we could have managed perfectly well without. I have no idea whether this practice continues as it is now many years later, but it certainly bothered me at the time. If I had any say, which I occasionally did, I always suggested we stock up on disposables as they would always be needed and would get used eventually thereby safeguarding the next year's budget without wasting money on unnecessary stuff.
I used to set myself personal challenges to carry out procedures using the minimum number of disposable items or using smaller / cheaper items for the same tasks as a way of saving money, but it was not the laboratory's policy to do that, just my own practice to contribute in a small way.

Everyone requiring treatment at hospitals in our area are asked if they were born here/how long they have lived in UK. Why would this be thought of as racist? Why is asking about the need for interpreters racist? We shout racism far too quickly.

I would happily show a form of identity to prove I was entitled to free NHS treatment if it meant that the system wasn't being abused. I think it is naive to think that everybody in the world can use the system and it still be able to cope with the raft of treatments it offers. At the same time, I think there have to be times when treatment is offered regardless of status, ie. in an emergency.

ican we microchip pets, I would be happy to be microchipped with my NHS, passport and NI numbers so I just had to show my wrist to a machine. It would be so much easier than going through all my cards looking for the right one. Just think how easy that would be for any employer, at the airport, landlords etc. {grin]. Now I've opened the floodgates to receive quotes from George Orwell!

Nonnie, me too but I expect we're being naive as to the downsides of that. I think microchips can move and you might be having to put another body part to the machine.

Not precious about my body parts ican but maybe the person doing the scanning might have a problem!

Mabel2, it’s clearly absolute rubbish for anyone to suggest that being asked to show that you are eligible to receive NHS treatment is racist. Our Accident and Emergency departments provide free treatment for anyone, regardless of who they are or where they’re from. That’s as it should be, no one wants accident victims being ignored BUT that is where free treatment should stop. We have all paid for our NHS and it is NOT for the whole world regardless of what Trisher says. We have a National Health Service, not a World Health Service!

Right before you lot start throwing accusations around you might like to look at what I actually said. I said it was racist to ask someone who looks as if they might not be British where they were born. It is racist to judge people on their looks. I didn't say it was racist to ask everyone who accesses NHS services for identification. And actually everyone is asked for identification in the form of your address and the name of your GP. Our A&E does provide services free of charge in emergencies but that doesn't mean they don't collect fees from people afterwards. It may interest you to know that I had an accident on holiday some time ago, all my treatment was covered by my insurance, and when I came home I successfully took action against the holiday company for negligence, shortly after I received the payment I got a letter from the NHS saying if I had received treatment in the UK after the accident (I hadn't) I would have to repay the costs out my award. So the NHS does follow up on treatment nd costs.

One of my daughters is constantly asked where she is from/where she was born because of her looks and accent. Quite often these questions come from people who are themselves not British. Not long ago, here in the U.K. an Italian man approached her in a library to ask where in Italy she was from and then when she said she wasn't from Italy insisted she simply must be Italian because of her looks!! Others have asked if she's Australian/Greek/Swedish/Arabic/Middle-Eastern/Spanish/South African/Jewish/French.

She doesn't regard any of this as racist, just people being curious and interested in their fellow humans.

My DD2 is often thought to be 'other' than English because of her dark hair, eyes and olive skin. Most people who know my roots assume she gets her looks from my Palestinian family but in fact she is like her paternal grandmother. My grandma had blue eyes. Stereotypes do not always work!

It is amazing that some people don't understand racism isn't just how one person feels about something. It's about how actions can be used which make life difficult or different for someone because of the colour of their skin or their ethnic origin. So how would you judge if a person 'looked as if they might not be British"?

So Trisher, taking your point further, ' It's about how actions can be used which make life difficult or different for someone because of the colour of their skin or their ethnic origin. '
I would be interested in how you view the so called positive discrimination policies employed in many industries, which whilst helpful to those included in them (mainly minorities) are less than positive for those excluded, who may be just as able as those included. By your definition this is racist towards those of the majority who are excluded.
Before you 'have a go' at me, I'm playing devils advocate here. Everyone should be treated the same.

If it is considered racist to ask someone where they are from if they look and sound as though they are from another country, then the alternative is to ask every single user of the NHS the question whenever they present for treatment, emergency or not, at an NHS centre.

Added up over the day, that would take up a lot of time and produce a lot of paperwork to be filed away. It would also generate a great deal of resentment among those who were born here and whose ancestors have lived here as far back as anyone can remember - yet another layer of bureaucracy to be applied. Surely there is a first filter of whether an ordinary non-racist person would think "Here is a visitor to our shores. Is he/she entitled to use the facilities that we pay taxes for, or will he/she have to be invoiced?" If they are asked, it only takes a moment for them to answer - and to produce their passport if they are visiting.

One of the interesting things about people is where they are from and how they live/lived differently there, how their ethnic or genetic mix has produced their looks and stature and bearing, Asking about these things in a friendly way isn't racist. Not noticing any difference in their appearance is like wearing a blindfold in an art gallery, or earplugs at a concert. They could be very pleased to talk about the differences. What would NOT be welcomed is implying that the difference makes them inferior in some way - THAT would definitely make things difficult for them and be racist.

Yes exactly, Elegran wrt your 15:16 post. Asking a friendly question isn't racist.

It would also be racist to assume everyone who did not appear "White British" is likely to be a recent immigrant or a visitor to UK not entitled to free services.

When registering with a GP one has to provide a range of information including NI and NHS number. Presumably if these cannot be provided it would indicate non-entitlement to free treatment and an invoice for any services would be sent.
I have been in A&E and seen people given forms to complete if they have no GP or have declared they are not entitled to free NHS care.

Exactly PECS Everyone who is treated in A&E is expected to supply an address and the name of their GP. If they have neither of these it might be appropriate (unless they were obviously homeless or a rough sleeper) to ask about their country of origin. BUT this cannot be done on the basis of "looks". The only policy I can think similar to such an idea is the Nazi idea of measuring heads and faces, and looking at colouring in the search for a true Aryan race. When is it a 'friendly' question, are we not talking about officialdom here? I can think of loads of times people have posted about how doctors/hospital receptionists have treated them in a less than caring way. Are we to assume that when asking this particular question all staff will be 'friendly'?
Mabel2It's an interesting question, and one that comes up as well in the creation of all-women short lists for MPs. You would hope that after a cerain time had passed most organisations would have managed to create as diverse a workforce as possible, but that doesn't seem to happen. It woud be best done I think by looking at the job requirements and including in that the necessity to be more diverse, hopefully then the peolpe who apply can be sorted not just by their qualifications but also by the extra qualities they bring to the role.

Mabel2 I take your point. In today's Sunday Times there is a piece about a man who has taken up a grant intended for black people because, apparently, he looks black. He has white parents, white grandparents and great grandparents. He decided he was black and apparently that qualified him for the grant. He must have fulfilled whatever other criteria was required. Sometimes I do wonder if positive discrimination has gone too far but that may be because I never see any negative discrimination in my life or in the town where I live. I see black and Asian people who are integrated and just a normal part of life. Don't see any oppressed women either. In another thread I mentioned that DS is discriminated in various grant applications because he is a white heterosexual, able bodied male and the application forms make it quite clear he has no chance of being offered the grants.

The most discriminated against group is white, heterosexual, middle class, able bodied men. You are right to mention this Nonnie, especially as your son has been a victim of this. In actual fact so has one of my sons. Not sure too many people are bothered about this though, it’s not a fashionable group or cause.

In what way do you perceive white, heterosexual, middle class, able bodied men to be discriminated against? White, heterosexual, middle class, able bodied men, I suspect, make up the largest %age of the employed workforce so it would be hard to argue they were discriminated against but I am happy to listen to other opinions. Please can you post the link to the evidence for this shocking statistic.

Often grants are ring fenced because they are intended to create greater equity for minority groups.

Thanks PECS, your question sums up the question I want to put to maddyone.
White working class boys are achieving less educationally and in the workplace than other groups. That is not the case for White, heterosexual, middle class, able bodied men. At least I haven't seen any research than supports that statement. I will read any links provided in support .

Every piece of so called positive discrimination, causes negative effects on those excluded from the policies of the positive discrimination. Surely we should be aiming to end ALL discrimination positive or negative?

It is not discrimination if it is making a situation more equitable! Redressing a balance through some positive discrimination is not actually discriminating against the majority!

It would be ideal if all jobs/grants etc. were equally available to all appropriate candidates. However there is a great deal of evidence to show that certain groups, equally qualified etc, are at a disadvantage when applying for jobs etc. Positive discrimination helps to address this.

In a case that I cannot find on the internet the family of a deaf person interpreted for them and a person was later murdered by the patient.

It is not good practice to allow the family to interpret. Mistakes can be made, there is often a bias, and it means the patient has not privacy and frequently it is the younger generation the children who are expected to interpret which is unacceptable.

Also this means that the person is unlikely to understand the medical language as they have not been trained, there is a good chance that they are not fluent in all of the legal, medical or technical terminology that they may need to interpret,