Payment for prescriptions

People just don't think things through, IMO.

If the problem is people ordering too much of a prescription item, why not manage how much can be ordered in any time period? I have a repeat prescription and can only order it after a given period has passed. I'm also asked every now and again if I still need it. Why impose charges that won't even cover the cost, purely as a deterrent and to make you feel that nobody is getting one past on you?

Recently I had Covid and got a medication delivered to the house late at night. Free of course, I'm in Scotland. I didn't have to wait till the next day and I didn't have to try to organise somebody to go and get it for me, get them to pay and make sure they got their money back from me.

The availability of free prescriptions is about having a better life and society. Not something that comes high on this list of priorities for people who can't see past the £-sign.

I’m not sure where this vast accumulation of drugs comes in.

DH has heart problems and gets a monthly prescription, all are used.

I’ve had anti-biopics in the past - all used.

I will admit to not using the tamoxifen prescribed, but never went back for a repeat prescription. Why would I?

Certainly raise the age of free prescriptions. We were at our top earnings and no longer supporting our children when we started to get free prescriptions. I’m sure Rod Stewart and Mick Jagger don’t need them either!

Witzend I don't think anybody doubts that people need to pay more for the NHS. The question is: do people pay as individuals for the treatment they need on a "Pay as you go" basis or through a separate top-up insurance - or do people pay through the tax system, so that those who can afford to pay more contribute more, while people receive the treatment they need, regardless of ability to pay?

I have long thought that prescriptions should not be free. I have seen many cases of people re-ordering a full sheet of prescription medication, even if they do not need it. There seems little management of repeat prescriptions by GPs. Anything that is offered free, will invariably be abused by some. Just a nominal fee (not suggesting the full price of drugs), would, in my opinion, deter people from re-ordering drugs they no longer need. I think this should apply to everyone, except perhaps. those dependent on life saving drug regimes for chronic illnesses.

Following on from my post, I strongly believe that it should also be run not for profit which is why I think a charitable trust is right.

What about people who are too fat (in your opinion Witzend).

How much should they pay?

Or people who come off motorbikes when they could have taken the bus?

As long as it’s efficiently means tested, I honestly don’t see why not. It’s often said how much better healthcare is in other European countries - but many do charge for various things.

According to my Swedish friend, everyone there pays something for prescriptions (with an annual cap), for visits to GP and A&E, and the ‘board’ element of hospital stays.
And Sweden is popularly supposed to be some sort of socialist Utopia.

As for pensioners’ free prescriptions, it used to infuriate me to see how a friend of ours stockpiled masses of various items - only for them all to be periodically thrown away. I once counted over 60 items in his bathroom - half a dozen each of this and that. When he died he left 2 houses paid for and well over £1m cash. But he was as tight as they come - if he’d had to pay even £2-3 each I bet he’d never have taken so many things he evidently didn’t need. He was even getting paracetamol on prescription, FGS - it costs pennies in supermarkets.

And I bet he’s not the only such case, far from it.

What government will ever have the guts to introduce any such thing, though? They’ll all be terrified of losing votes.
People moan about creeping privatisation, but unless we start paying a bit more, that’s going to be the alternative.

A bit off topic, but I for one would like to see charges for people who end up in A&E purely because they’ve had far too much to drink!

Thankyou BlueBell you're the first to mention privatisation by stealth, it would be yet another nail in the coffin of the NHS

It is a worry as the Tories are surreptitiously changing our system, but there is nothing democratic about it.

We, as a country, I am 100% convinced do not want a USA style health care system, but that is where it appears to being sold. Sunak has been in talks with USA health providers.

Whitewavemark2

I think one way is to look at how other countries provide health care and try to take the best.

I did look at the various health care systems at one time, and was impressed.

Just because our system was pioneering when it began doesn't mean it is still the best for a larger population with far more treatments available now.

I think one way is to look at how other countries provide health care and try to take the best.

I did look at the various health care systems at one time, and was impressed.

Aveline

My Dad, a GP, always felt that there should be a small charge for appointments. Really just to reduce the numbers of failed appointments. People with long term conditions need not pay. I used to be appalled at the number of DNAs at GP surgeries when I used to have to book clinics there.
Changed days now of course when you have to beg and plead for an appointment.
We are reaping the whirlwind of reduced places on nursing courses and prioritising lucrative foreign students on medical courses.

There have, apparently, been many DNAs at a local hospital because people were sent their appointment texts/emails and letters after the appointment time.
DH was one of them. When he did get another appointment, the Consultant said they wondered why so many were failing to keep their appointments.

There is a lot of inefficiency and waste in the system.

Means testing penalises those whom Theresa May called Just About Managing and in itself costs money.

Means testing always sounds logical until you work out the cost of administering such a scheme. Forms to be filled in, claims to be checked, details to be verified to avoid fraud - and so it goes on.

Doodledog

*There also has to be a recognition that many people have not "paid into the system" for a variety of reasons - and, as a society, we can't leave those people to rot in the gutter.*
And I have never failed to recognise that.

We agree much more than you think!

You shouldn't take my attempts to play devil's advocate too seriously!

Doodledog

How is it defined now? It seems to fluctuate depending on who uses it, and which group is being discussed.

Exactly! There's a "delightful" character on one of my local Facebook groups, who thinks that the NHS shouldn't pay for mental health care. His definition of "need" isn't the same as mine!

There also has to be a recognition that many people have not "paid into the system" for a variety of reasons - and, as a society, we can't leave those people to rot in the gutter.
And I have never failed to recognise that.

Doodledog

*How would it be decided who is "poor"? We all know that there are people who are a few pounds over the threshold for any state benefits and this would exacerbate the problem.*
Which is what I have been saying for years on here, and you have always countered it by saying that means-testing was my 'hobby-horse' and that defending pensioners didn't take account of the fact that working people were also poor. What has changed?

Nothing has changed! I actually agree with you in principle, but there would still be anomalies and I don't know how they could be sorted out. There also has to be a recognition that many people have not "paid into the system" for a variety of reasons - and, as a society, we can't leave those people to rot in the gutter.

If we didn't refer to the state pension as a "benefit" it would be much clearer which benefits are not paid when you are in hospital etc. Nobody would think it appropriate if someone suggested any other pension should not be paid in these circumstances.

You lot don’t know you’re born! I would say the UK is the best country in the world for cheap/free medical treatment.

This is what I found re benefits and hospitalisation:

Payments you get of Disability Living Allowance (DLA), Personal Independence Payment (PIP), Adult Disability Payment Scotland and Attendance Allowance (AA) will stop after you have been in hospital for 28 days. If you are under 18 on the day you enter hospital, your DLA, Adult Disability Payment Scotland or PIP payments will not stop.

It's all explained more fully on Turn2Us website (where I found this).

How is it defined now? It seems to fluctuate depending on who uses it, and which group is being discussed.

Need? Same as now I think.

I would vote for that, WWM. I would really like to see a social contract that could not be broken, so that we all know what we are paying for when we pay in and what we can expect to get at point of need. Oh, and how 'need' is going to be defined.

We need a national conversation and a democratic way forward.

For my part I would stick to the principle “free at the point of delivery”

I would ensure a dedicated tax that was written into the constitution, and I would set a a charitable trust to run it OUT OF GOVERNMENTS HANDS.