Imagine life without the NHS?

westendgirl

Perhaps I should have said that The NHS should be cross party, not taken out of politics. I would though still like to see our government looking at how other countries manage their's.

They do look at other countries. This government seems to like talking about the Australian system while moving towards the American one.

westendgirl

Our pensions are some of the lowest .

Again, it's difficult to compare because many people in the UK have private pensions, whereas in a country such as Germany, few people have private occupational pensions, but are compulsorily signed up for the "state system". They don't receive top-ups either, nor do so many own property outright.

I'm not sure - I'm going out now, but I'll check it out. They're not directly comparable anyway because some countries pay for social care and some don't. Nevertheless, it does show that the US system doesn't provide good value for money. A few people, who can pay, receive superb treatment, but on average outcomes are worse.

This is quite interesting reading:

Conclusion: Four features distinguish top performing countries from the United States: 1) they provide for universal coverage and remove cost barriers; 2) they invest in primary care systems to ensure that high-value services are equitably available in all communities to all people; 3) they reduce administrative burdens that divert time, efforts, and spending from health improvement efforts; and 4) they invest in social services, especially for children and working-age adults.

www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2021/aug/mirror-mirror-2021-reflecting-poorly

No single country is best on all the criteria, but the US is (apart from one measure) consistently the worst.

Our pensions are some of the lowest .

The graph demonstrates that Americans pay more for their health care and would seem to get poorer outcomes too. That's a very good reason not to go down that route. I wonder if this graph factors in what people pay in addition ie in co-payments.

Secondly, pensioners continue paying for healthcare.

Many of them spend more, for a start:

Perhaps I should have said that The NHS should be cross party, not taken out of politics. I would though still like to see our government looking at how other countries manage their's.

There is as always a but in the non NHS systems. Some of us may a bit more then if under private but if you have a serious injury that changes your life so unable to work and need continual health support you will never have to worry about having to pay. I’m nurse and see reviews about USA diabetic some have to go weeks without insulin because of the extreme cost. If you have Netflix watch the film Purple Hearts it enlightening. My mum who died 15yrs ago aged 85yrs had been a nurse from the age of 17 said those who wanted the end of the NHS had not live in the times without it, if the had they would put more value on. My uncle who always had private that match Nhs (not a&e)stopped 10 years ago when the yearly premium hit £9000. So up the NHS.

BTW JaneJudge All elective surgery is discussed by a panel. I was recently refused a breast implant after surgery due to my age and diabetes. The cost of failure was deemed too high.

I belong to a breast cancer Facebook group and there are many American members. It's horrifying to read what some of their insurance companies won't fund. It's no surprise that there is a significant difference between survival rates of wealthier Americans and poorer ones, especially ethnic minorities.

When I was being prepped for an MRI scan, I overheard a telephone conversation between the radiologist and administrators. A private patent wanted an MRI, but her insurance company refused to fund it, unless she had an ultrasound first. MRIs are more effective, but many times more expensive than ultrasounds.

I don't know if you are aware but if you have a disability or illness and you need an expensive operation it does go to a panel meeting anyway, a bit like it does within social services and they discuss whether the operation is viable and ethical and whether they should fund it. Sometimes further meetings are had to discuss the matter further.

I have read some of the discussion and it has been really interesting btw. Someone I know is American, middle class and she said even if you have insurance loss adjusters can make decisions on your life, rather than medics. I think I'd live constantly in fear

MaizieD

growstuff

How can the NHS be "taken out of politics", when one of the main responsibilities of a government is to distribute resources?

I could see that 'taken out of politics' could be another way of saying 'stop trying to privatise it'.

On the other hand, I take issue, again, with the assertion that it has had money thrown at it; because it hasn't. For the last 12 years it has been subjected to very serious 'real terms' cuts in funding. There is absolutely no reason why the state couldn't invest more in the NHS. It is full of desperately overworked staff struggling to provide a service. If it were full of staff sitting around doing nothing there would be grounds for 'savings' and reduced funding. But that just isn't the case.

I agree with you. I see it as a question of values. Does the government want a national health service, which treats everybody according to need? It will always be political because there are some people who don't believe they should pay for other people's care, when they can afford what they need personally.

mokryna

growstuff I’m sorry but I don’t agree to not treating people over 80.
When does it stop .. those that are mentally handicapped or mis fortuned at birth or through life?

I think a way should be found if people want to use an end of life program.

I was among a group of UK medical people talking. The conversation was about an 96 year old. She had a skin cancer and although she couldn’t look after herself, lived in a nursing home, didn’t know her carer, where she lived etc. the doctor still operated on her. Was that wrong? Was that a step too far?

I don't agree with not treating people over 80 - certainly not - I gave it as an example of saving the NHS loads of money, far more than all the tinkering with charging people for missed appointments, etc.

My point was (and is) that if we want expensive care, which is what treating elderly people and chronic conditions is, we need to pay for it as a society. The alternative doesn't bear thinking about (which you've just demonstrated).

''Privatisation technique: defund, make sure things don’t work, people get angry, you hand it over to private capital. — Noam Chomsky''

I'd add another step in the middle- give people glimpses of a 'better' private system to create need and envy, and being part of the 'elite' somehow.

Mokryna I don't think Growstuff or anyone else has suggested not treating people over the age of 80, quite the reverse.
With regard to treating a 96 year old with skin cancer, IMO it's an ethical question, ie Could the patient give informed consent? Did she understand what was wrong with her and why she was being operated on? What would have been the consequence of leaving the cancer? Often relatives want everything possible to be done to keep a loved one alive when sometimes it is not in their best interests. I have already made my wishes known and that is, should I become mentally impaired and unable to give informed consent, I would not wish for any treatment that would prolong my life.

growstuff

How can the NHS be "taken out of politics", when one of the main responsibilities of a government is to distribute resources?

I could see that 'taken out of politics' could be another way of saying 'stop trying to privatise it'.

On the other hand, I take issue, again, with the assertion that it has had money thrown at it; because it hasn't. For the last 12 years it has been subjected to very serious 'real terms' cuts in funding. There is absolutely no reason why the state couldn't invest more in the NHS. It is full of desperately overworked staff struggling to provide a service. If it were full of staff sitting around doing nothing there would be grounds for 'savings' and reduced funding. But that just isn't the case.

growstuff I’m sorry but I don’t agree to not treating people over 80.
When does it stop .. those that are mentally handicapped or mis fortuned at birth or through life?

I think a way should be found if people want to use an end of life program.

I was among a group of UK medical people talking. The conversation was about an 96 year old. She had a skin cancer and although she couldn’t look after herself, lived in a nursing home, didn’t know her carer, where she lived etc. the doctor still operated on her. Was that wrong? Was that a step too far?

westendgirl

Well said Foxie. The NHS isn't working now . I think it needs a complete rethink as what worked previously just isnt satisfactory . It should be taken out of politics as all successive governments seem to do is throw more money
that way and think it's enough. There are no restructuring plans.Surely it wouldn't hurt to look at how our European neighbours mange theirs. They don't have the waiting lists and comparison tables have long showed that we are well down the bottom end when it comes to survival rates.It worked well at the time , was quite a brave step in the dark I'm sure to move away from the panel system. Surely that bravery is needed now.

Have you ever thought that the system is not working because it is set up to fail? The theory of privatisation is very clear and follows exactly the same pattern.

How can the NHS be "taken out of politics", when one of the main responsibilities of a government is to distribute resources?

westendgirl

Well said Foxie. The NHS isn't working now . I think it needs a complete rethink as what worked previously just isnt satisfactory . It should be taken out of politics as all successive governments seem to do is throw more money
that way and think it's enough. There are no restructuring plans.Surely it wouldn't hurt to look at how our European neighbours mange theirs. They don't have the waiting lists and comparison tables have long showed that we are well down the bottom end when it comes to survival rates.It worked well at the time , was quite a brave step in the dark I'm sure to move away from the panel system. Surely that bravery is needed now.

The NHS has been restructured twice since 2010. What have restructurings achieved? And how would you restructure now? Sorry, but all I ever read is that the NHS must change, but nobody ever seems to come up with concrete ideas. Most of our European neighbours pay considerably more for healthcare. Change for its own sake because something isn't working isn't good change.

No it probably won't happen. I have spent £95 this month on private physio. I would far rather spend £15 or £20 per month additional "NHS tax" and have access through it, and enable others to do so too. I realise not everyone can pull out £95 before anyone jumps in but I was bent in half most of the day with spinal spasms.

Well said Foxie. The NHS isn't working now . I think it needs a complete rethink as what worked previously just isnt satisfactory . It should be taken out of politics as all successive governments seem to do is throw more money
that way and think it's enough. There are no restructuring plans.Surely it wouldn't hurt to look at how our European neighbours mange theirs. They don't have the waiting lists and comparison tables have long showed that we are well down the bottom end when it comes to survival rates.It worked well at the time , was quite a brave step in the dark I'm sure to move away from the panel system. Surely that bravery is needed now.

HousePlantQueen - I’m beginning to believe that any party that says how much extra tax will be taken to better fund the nhs could be electable.

Many of us have direct experience of getting better, quicker care from GP’s in other European countries. Many would be prepared to pay £20-25 to see their GP. We shouldn’t have to wait 4 weeks for a ‘routine’ appointment.

We aren’t training or retaining doctors, nurses and there’s a crisis in social care.

The idea of a cross party approach to finding the best way forward sounds like a plan. Won’t happen though will it

I agree with a lot of what Foxie8 says, as well as with Growstuff. The NHS does need a cross party, non -political 'sort out', and there is no doubt that huge amounts need to be spent on the actual structure, the buildings. We, the public, also need to face the truth that if we want an all encompassing cradle to grave health system, including social care, mental health provision (desperately in need) then we will have to pay more for it. Not individually, not through jumping the queue and paying to have our knees replaced, but through taxation. This is a huge, potentially unthinkable step for the leadership of any political party, to go into an election telling people they will have to pay a bit more.