NHS

www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/carol-ackroyd/nhs-managers-are-being-forced-to-lie-to-public

I'm sure some of you will not believe this, either.

If the government got its act together about tax fraud, that would solve the problem.

I think people are entitled to comment on the NHS based on their own experience, given that everyone else seems to have an axe to grind. The press by and large blames everything that goes wrong on the NHS without any acknowledgement that it might be due to something such as human error or incompetence that might occur in any system. Solutions that might involve the private sector are shot down not on their merits but because they would erode the purity of the NHS concept, even though private/public partnership mixes, including an insurance element, work well in other countries.

My own family's recent experience is that the NHS works very well, at GP, A&E, and in- and out-patient levels, but that it does suffer from management, not clinical or nursing, incompetence. It also suffers from financial constraints due not least to its own success: people are living longer than was envisaged when it was set up and lots of treatments to keep us alive are very expensive. And extra funding is hard to come by; one poster suggested that its allocation should go up from 7% to 10% (not sure of what: GDP? HMRC's tax take?), but did not say where the extra 3% should come from: defence, social security, education?

I don't pretend to have solutions, but I don't see why posters should be shot down for saying that the NHS works for them; personal experience is part of the mix.

GadTea You referred to your own experience of care wherever it is that you live. It seems that you are fortunate. Many people are not. For instance, In some areas people have to be virtually blind with cataracts before they will be operated on. Because you spoke particularly of your own favourable situation, I can see why durhamjen made the comment she did - it's not all about you, or me, or those that are doing OK - it's about the many people who are struggling to get access to health care.

The people who keep saying something needs to be done, and that might include privatisation or some sort of health insurance, have overlooked the fact that in 2014 the results of a reputable piece of research carried out in 2011 found the NHS to be the best out of 11 countries, in terms of cost, efficiency and access to healthcare. Switzerland came second, Sweden third and the US last. Following nearly 6 years of Conservative cuts and other de-stabilising factors such as a top-down re-organisation that even the Conservatives admit was a failure, the NHS is in chaos and many hospitals are now expected to be closed. This was what Labour warned of before the 2010 election - because we had seen it before when the Conservatives were last in power. It has been widely reported that an even smaller percentage of money is now being spent on the NHS, as compared with other developed countries. It is no wonder that the system is failing.

As we're in anecdotal mood, my personal experience of the NHS over the last five years is that it's got much worse. I have number of chronic conditions and have seen the level of primary care plummet. Clinical Commissioning Groups, the internal market and outsourcing to the cheapest provider and have been a disaster.

What has that got to do with anything Dj? Seems a bit personal! Obviously, the NHS is in a mess and needs sorting out - but how?

Kitty's are not.

I'm sure that if we wait ling enough, you will tell us.
BTW, my experiences are miles away fro Leicester.

If you look at the map on the link, which obviously you are not going to do, but never mind, you will see that there is a Leicester and Rutland Keep our NHS Public.

Why is that if everything is okay in Leicester NHS?

I am bothering because I have my own opinions and the feedback I get from people working in the NHS. I prefer to base my opinions on my own experiences, rather than a selection of jaundiced links that some one else selects.
The fact that you started the thread does not mean that you own it, or have the only opinion that matters. Anyone can quote a load of links, how about some original thought.

I believe that what Dh and I see, and hear about from friends and colleagues is multiplied across the NHS.

Are people only allowed to post if they agree with you, dj? I didn't know that was what GN was about.

So why are you both bothering with this thread when it was started with that particular point and link in mind?

I told you who I am when I started the thread, GandTea, and told you why I started it.
It's about the demise of the NHS, which is what Simon Stevens and Jeremy Hunt want.
I am worried about it for everyone; you are not.

If all you go on is first hand experience of the NHS, you do not see what is happening over all.

But, dj, who is to say the NHS will get worse? And, who said that buying private medical insurance will be the way privatisation will work. Like GandTea, I can't be bothered to read links but base my opinion on first hand experience of working in the NHS.

And, I don't have the answers but can see an awful lot of the problems.

Durhamjen.

"So all you care about is what happens to you? Etc Etc"

That is just bloody rude -- who the hell do you think you are.

No, I do not want to read your links, just a lazy way of trying to force your point across.

Do I care about the NHS, yes, and I was putting my point of view, tough it it isn't the same as yours.

You and me both, vampire. It's a shame more people don't look at links.

I realised I hadn't made the already private bit clear after I posted.

But it was already an essay and I was worried people would be put off reading it lol.

Don't get me started on the already privatised bits or I'll truly be on my soapbox lol.

Actually, vampire, although I agree with your premise, it's not true that NHS money stays in the NHS. There are many private healthcare companies which charge the NHS and make profits from it already.
I am hoping that the Panama Papers will expose some of them.

Kitty, I wasn't accusing you of anything. I was just asking you to think about what will happen if the NHS gets worse. As Annsixty said, people already choose who will live and who will die.

Privatisation means people like me will not be able to get insurance. So I will probably die earlier than I would have done without an all-encompassing NHS, and like my grandfather did before the NHS came into being, because he could not afford the medication he needed.

The NHS does not just concern other people; it's about all those we care for as well.

I don't see how privatisation could make the NHS better. As it stands now all the money in the system stays in the system. If it is privatised then there will be shareholders who will expect dividends thereby taking money out of the system.

Health insurance companies are not charities. They are in business to make money no matter how caring their adverts make them appear. They're only interested in insuring healthy people who may have the odd problem. Their ideal customer would pay far more to them than they pay out. People with long term and chronic conditions are definitely not ideal customers and would either be declined or offered premiums that price cover out of the means of most people.

Health care is not cheap but then we are not a poor country, We are perfectly capable of funding an effective, up to date health service if only the government were willing to spend the money. If you think otherwise just remember how easily successive governments have found the money to go to war in the last 20 years or so. They may not call them conflicts or one of several other euphenisms but at the end of the day we send in troops and/or drop bombs which cost millions of pounds. The money we spend killing and maiming people in other countries could be used to benefit the people of this country.

dj, I was pointing out why things are in crisis. I did not suggest that one should live and one should die, merely that someone who would have died five years ago probably wouldn't now and that has cost implications. Please do not imply that I did!

Had you read my first post you would see that I do not profess to have any answers - I just say we need a radical rethink. That might involve privatisation but should definitely involve fewer 'managers' coming up with yet more protocols etc and pushing more and more bits of paper across yet more desks.

And, in my very recent experience, they are inefficient and incompetent and wield too much power over the practitioners at the coalface.

I am extremely worried about the NHS. The so called "Future Fit" programme want to close an A/E unit in Shropshire leaving only one for a large population that covers quite a chunk of mid Wales. Surely this can't be what those who voted for this government envisaged. Obviously since the inception of the NHS medicine has become more sophisticated and people live longer so it has to cost more, and I do not see how it is possible for private companies to run health services at a profit. Our NHS is the most cost effective in the world, but clearly needs more money spending on it. Why can't the government have an honest debate about this instead of constantly expecting health services to make savings?

So all you care about is what happens to you?
Fortunately there are others who care about keeping the NHS national and for all.
Of course the article is biased. It's written by people who work in the NHS.

Despite what has happened this week, there are still 50% of junior doctors who want to leave the NHS, and 90% of GPs are unhappy.
Won't bother giving you the links.
But you're okay.

Durhamjen. No I have not read it. I find that type of article so biased that I cannot be bothered to look.

That already happens dj

So what do you suggest, kitty?
Should he have died because it cost too much?
Who chooses who dies and who lives?

Trisher, we have a bigger population who live longer, there are illnesses that can be cured when previously they couldn't, babies living after much shorter gestation periods etc.

DD's Fil has just had a major heart op. He had previously had a few stays in hospital when it was expected he would die. He spent 3 months in hospital after his op, first in ICU, then needing less and less intensive care until he had an infection and went back into ICU and the whole cycle started again. He is now at home but has regular checks at home from a variety of specialist teams, he has regular hospital appointments of one sort or another and will continue to be monitored for months, if not years, to come.

Five years ago a friend's father died of exactly the same problem - a similar scenario must happen countless times with other illnesses as procedures, knowledge and expertise advance.

That's why someone needs to get hold of the NHS and make it fit for today.