NHS

durhamjen's post is very chilling and one section in particular demonstrates the underlying values of the boss of the NHS, which fits in nicely with the Conservative pledge to reduce the role of the state in all areas of public service provision:

"Simon Stevens' previous employment was as the President of Global Strategy for United Health of America [the world's largest private health care company] where he lobbied for healthcare around the world to be included in the infamous Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnershipn [TTIP]. He didn't oppose it. He lobbied in favour of it!"

I think Whitewave's point is that it could be so much better for everyone if the government was committed to it and to spending 10% on it, instead of 7%.

Have you read what Simon Stevens is wanting to do, GandTea?

999callfornhs.org.uk/footprints/4592357931

That's my point Whitewave, I experience am improvement in services to the patient not a delcine. That is all the areas I have experience of, from my GP surgery onwards.
I requested a Drs. appointment on Wednesday afternoon, they fitted me in the next day. At the hospital I had to wait 3 weeks for a CT scan. I cannot ask better than that.
When I had private Med Ins, I could not get appointments any quicker, nor was the care any better.

Expensive advances there may have been but provision differed so much in the past. My mum had a hysterectomy in 1948. She was in hospital for 6 weeks, was visited by a district nurse for about 6 months and also had a (paid for) cleaner because she wasn't allowed to do housework. Procedures may be more expensive but hospital stays are much shorter and there is nothing like as much care provision.

Every time this is aired on GN, I ask how the NHS can be all things to all people all of the time with all the (expensive) advances there have been. I have no knowledge at all but it seems obvious that there needs to be a complete rethink about how healthcare can/should be funded in the PRESENT circumstances.

And, fewer managers, oversight and regulations would be a start (said in a heartfelt way!)

But the point being gand that none of the private sector providers are going to cut to the extent that their patients will suffer. They would soon be out of business if they were.

Despite "cuts" our local hospital is providing a better service that it has ever done.
Waiting times are very short (I doubt private care would be any quicker unless you were in the Harley St. bracket). Appointments are very punctual, and on the one occasion when I had to wait, we were informed of the reason (consultant called to surgery)

Having worked in the private sector all my working life, financial cuts are commonplace. Such cuts do not effect the product or service, they mean that the waste and inefficiency has to be addressed, there is plenty of that still to be worked on in the NHS. One may think that once efficiency and waste have been addressed that there is no more to be cut. However changes in practices and technology means that one can continue to make improvements.

In my job, there was an unwritten rule that myself and my colleges should provide savings of 4x our salaries year on year - we never failed to meet or exceed that target (probably be looking for a job if we didn't). We often hear about money being wasted on consultancy, but a new pair of eyes from a different perspective can see the obvious that is missed.

The media is full of the financial crises in the NHS because of the downward pressure being placed on it by the Treasury. By the end of this parliament it is intended that only 7% of GDP will be spent on the NHS. Most European countries spend up to 10 or 11% including those whose economy is more precarious than ours.

Of course we could all abandon the NHS and choose private care. I have recently obtained quotes and an example would be Saga which quoted £198 per month for a basic cover to £272 for reasonable cover. This is for husband and wife and does not cover any existing conditions. So if we abandon the concept of the NHS and want full cover, we for one simply wouldn't be able to afford it, as I have no idea what it would cost to cover us for heart, and breast cancer, hypertension, high blood sugar on top of the offered charge.

We must as a matter of urgency decide once and for all what we want, what the country is prepared to afford and how we are to make up any gap in care/treatment if we are not prepared to pay for it.

Luckygirl, I had to stay a couple of days in a cardiac care unit and I was very impressed with the nurses. However, I guess they're working there every day and know what they're doing. My problem with the diabetic nurse who works in my GP practice is that it's only part of her job. I don't know how long or intensive her training was, but she really doesn't have the breadth of knowledge of a qualified doctor and can't stray from the NICE pathway.

Specialist nurses can be very valuable indeed. I know that my OH has an excellent service from the PD nurse. He is a qualified doctor and would soon make his views known if she was talking rubbish. I had good service from a cardiac nurse specialist; and my friend has found her stoma nurse invaluable.

What we do not want are generalist nurses taking over the role of doctors as a cheap option. We cannot allow professional standards to fall.

Sorry, mumofmadboys, I'm seriously unimpressed by the diabetic specialist nurse in my practice. All she ever does is follow official guidelines. She just doesn't have the knowledge to discuss side issues or to discuss related conditions. Appointments with her are a waste of time.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ttip-campaigners-and-trade-unions-applaud-tory-eurosceptics-for-joining-jeremy-corbyn-in-opposing-a7038141.html

To save the NHS from TTIP, they will produce an amendment to the queen's speech.

They will not have the money, Jane10. Private hospitals charge more because they have to make a profit for their shareholders out of the NHS.
Have you looked at the link in the OP, to see about your area?

The point is that they want nurses not to be specialists, but to take over more from GPs, therby being generalists.

Harrigran, when I had my dissection, I was taken to an HDU at the Freeman.
The nurse there asked me where the stitches were so she could change the dressing, even though I had not had an operation.
Practice nurses are unlikely to come across dissections, as there are only about one a month in the whole of the North dealt with at the Freeman.
The only people I know who have had them are on a website.

Our local health board has announced that it will no longer be sending patients to local private hospitals which they had been doing to reduce waiting times. Brilliant! Now they'll save money but waiting times will sky rocket! Who wins? Nobody

When I have seen a nurse practioner one of them is very good but still had to get a Dr in for a particular problem. The other was a waste of my and her time as she went out of the room 3 times " to consult with colleagues ", she could not even give me a prescription without consulting about dosage. Now if offered an appt with her I decline and wait for a Dr. The other one is ok for routine matters but I had a wait of 27 days recently to see a Dr.

Specialist nurses can be very knowledgeable in their own spheres and a great asset eg respiratory nurses or diabetic specialist nurses. They are often more available for phone call advice and such like.

A nurse that has not heard of aortic dissection ? was she a qualified nurse or a HCA ?

nhap.org/hospital-ae-and-maternity-closures/
From 2010 to 2014. It does not include what has closed last year and early this year, although it does say which ones might have closed.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-36307661

This is the latest idea to downgrade the NHS.

Last week I went to see a doctor and a nurse, having had appointments to see both of them for a month. When I got there, the nurse was there, but there was no doctor. I had to go back two days later to see a different doctor.
The nurse was not allowed to talk to me about thyroxine, but she could about the medication to do with the more serious aortic problem.
Sorry, but I'd rather talk to a doctor about that as well. The nurse had no idea why I was on those tablets and had not heard of an aortic dissection. In fact she suggested I come off one of them, even though she did not know why I was on them.
I really do not want more nurse practitioners. I want doctors to be recognised for the training that they do.

nhap.org/the-anatomy-of-privatisation/united-health-of-america

This is what Simon Stevens did in the US. Then he came over here and took over the NHS.

It shouldn't mean wholesale privatisation of the NHS. Not even Tories want that, surely.

999callfornhs.org.uk/footprints/4592357931

Whitewave, is this the link you want?
It covers all the groups, like NHA, Keep Our NHS Public (KONP).

999callfornhs.org.uk/999-network-map/4586656675

This is a map you can look at, and find out what is going on in your area.

I don't think all Conservative voters are rabidly anti public services. People choose the parties they do for a variety of reasons. Some do it out of habit, others believe in the trickle down theory, others support lower taxes and spending...I'm sure there are many more reasons. I'm certain many of them simply can't imagine that any government would undermine the NHS to the extent that it can no longer work.

I'm not a Conservative voter. I think this right wing, neo-fascist, elitest bunch of (expletive that rhymes with bankers) are hell bent on destroying the welfare state and reducing the working man to the mindset where he will accept any job at any rate of pay because the other option is to let his family and himself starve.

There have been a lot of complaints on Gransnet about poor GP services—difficulty getting an appointment, for instance. (I have no complaints about that myself; there has not been an occasion when I couldn't get an appointment promptly for Minibags or myself. Oh, and the receptionists are really helpful).

This is at least the second time I've read about the NHS budget cuts by the government on Gransnet, so even if it isn't on TV news (I wouldn't know; no TV) the information is available from somewhere.

I've a recollection that the £2.3bn cut is over five years and that, as a percentage of the entire NHS budget it is quite small.

People voted this government in for a second term, so presumably they accept that cuts are inevitable and that's why they are "not reacting". Voting in a Tory government always means a reduction in spending. One presumes that's what people want.

Also, what happens in other public service sectors and in residential provision has a knock-on effect on the NHS. We have already seen this with the reduction in support for elderly and infirm people at home and the closing of residential care homes. We have also seen it with the lack of funding for mental health provision, particularly for young people. Last night it was also reported that because of grave shortages in prison staff, there has been a huge increase in prisoner-on-prisoner and prisoner-on-prison officer violence, and in the incidence of suicide and self-harm, which has meant that ambulances are being called out to a prison somewhere every 20 minutes.