NHS

"Called the Sustainability and Transformation Plans, the NHS and the country is now split into 44 regional areas - known as “footprints”.

Each footprint has been ordered to produce a plan by 30th June this year to completely change the way the NHS works. Footprint Boards have to prove they can clear their debts within a year. And how do they do that? They cut more services, close more beds, sell off land and hospitals that are public assets."

This is what is going to happen to the NHS over the next year, Simon Steven's plan.
It frightens me. I'd rather more newspapers and TV channels spent time on discussing this rather than the EU referendum. However, we don't all get what we want.

To be honest, vq I think that is what a lot of people do using BUPA and workplace health insurance. They can get an earlier diagnosis privately even if they don't plan to go on in the private sector. Frankly private medicine could not have come close to the NHS for DH's transplant, for his bowel surgery and Lymphoma 10 years later and for open heart surgery for a graft/repair and an aortic valve replacement a couple of years after that!

Well said VQ.
Lazigirl, I am not ignoring your post, I just don't know enough about the subject to make any useful comment. I just pay my tax bill without question and probably always will.

That's why we pay National Insurance.

If you want to go private then that system already exists alongside the NHS. Pay to see your GP, pay for private prescriptions, pay for any tests you need, pay to see a consultant, pay to go into a private hospital and for any treatment you receive in said private hospital. In fact if you're happy/able /want to pay for your medical treatment then go for it. One less person in the queue to see the GP, one less person getting (sometimes) subsidised medication, one less person's tests taking up laboratory time, one less person taking an NHS consultant appointment and one less person taking up a hospital bed. Of course if anything goes wrong you'll find yourself in an NHS ambulance being rushed to the ICU of an NHS hospital. No private hospital would invest in the care needed there. It wouldn't make any profit.

I have no problem with anyone paying into the private system but the NHS must stay free at point of use. We should be proud of and nurture the NHS. Not let it become a private system by the back door.

Yes GandTea and this government is intent on reducing taxes, particularly to the better off!

I mean't free at the point of use, sorry I thought that was obvious. Of course it has to be paid for somehow, primarily from taxes.

The NHS isn't free though! It all has to be paid for somehow.

The NHS must be free to all, regardless. There has been discussions regarding excluding those with self inflicted problems caused by such things such as weight, smoking, drinking etc, but such distinctions should not be part of the NHS (even though atm, some are)

"Ahhhh! Those pesky, feckless scroungers! Let's kill 'em all off! What a great idea!"

I asked how people would feel about those that abuse the system, didn't imagine anyone would consider going that far, I do hope you are joking. (OK I'm sure you are)

I am sure that Doctors would never select who they treat.

However, I had an experience of the ambulance service that appalled me. I was a St. John's Ambulance member at the time and on the way to a business meeting in Brighton, stopped to help a down & out who had collapsed in the street and everyone was ignoring. The ambulance was very reluctant to carry him even though he was unconscious, as he was soaked in urine and covered in fleas.

I think we most likely need some sort of mix 'n match system. National insurance plus top up as can be afforded? 'They' know how much we all earn via HMRC. Can those on higher rate of tax be required to pay 1% extra health levy? Can certain charges be payable for certain items if a lower rate tax payer? Or similar. Plus hospitals can sell advertising - there's plenty of us likely to be around in them to see it. I'm still trying...

DH has some friends in the states, one has recently had to sell his house to pay for heart surgery, as he couldn't get insurance.

We must all agree on the basics I would have thought.
Sufficient to eat
Warmth
Housing
Education
Health.

That is what is called a civilised society.

It seems to me that in a decent society we should look after the most vulnerable, which includes the elderly, poor and ill. We can afford to do this as we are one of the richest countries in the developed world. It is political ideology that is causing shortage of funding. If we do not have a universal health system it will develop into a two tier system, where those that can pay get the treatment, and those that can't join the long queue. Do not be fooled into thinking that if you are on a moderate income you can give up luxuries to pay for GP appts etc. If you are unfortunate enough to develop a chronic illness, or an expensive to treat cancer I wonder how long private funds would last? This is what happens in US when patients run out of insurance money and have to go untreated. I do not think NHS is a sacred cow, or could not do with improvement, but it is one of the most efficient in the world for the money that is spent on it.

Before you go any further look at the different systems in Europe.

Lateral thinking (which I approve of, why should nurses and doctors not advertise their sponsors like football players? ) does however mean jettisoning the "cradle to the grave" "free" health care which the NHS promised, and for some people that is beyond the thin end of the wedge.
However this is already the case with dental health -many dentists no longer take NHS patients and I know while our children had free check ups and treatment, we now pay Denplan (which is an absolute rip off ) or take the risk of going completely private. Similarly with Opticians, free eye checks were only available to me from the age of 40 because my father had glaucoma and in any case it is not the eye test which is ruinous, but the cost of the lenses in my glasses.

Ahhhh! Those pesky, feckless scroungers! Let's kill 'em all off! What a great idea!

Yes, the NHS is free at the point of use and should remain so. There will always be people who are seen as less deserving, but it's not a doctor's job to decide.

Once we start deciding who is most deserving, it's a slippery slope deciding whether a 45 year old with a family is more deserving than an 80 year old with deteriorating health and no responsibilities.

Whatever system you opt for must be comprehensive, fair for all and affordable. Bit like the NHS really. All we need to do is bite the bullet, tell government hands off, and pay more, perhaps a dedicated insurance.

Thanks thatbags that's exactly what I was getting at. We are not a homogeneous population and neither are our healthcare requirements or pockets. A simple one size fits all approach patently doesn't fit in 2016.
Alea's description of their local hospital's way of addressing the A&E problem sounds good. Why not replicate it? If it means selling advertising space in the foyer to fund it why not? Sponsorship of specialist nurses could be a project for eg local Rotary clubs. I know this is wild blue sky thinking and also a bit 'back to the future' but I'm really trying to imagine how things could be done differently. (Local charities often seem to sponsor specialist nurses and therapists already.)

daphnedill I have no intention of getting into your personal circumstances, but at the time DH had been made redundant, he subsequently had a liver transplant and several return stays in hospital (50+ miles away, so visiting was expensive) and follow up appointments at a minimum of £30 in travelling costs each time, , he was unable to work and unable to claim any benefits, we had 2daughters at university and a mortgage to pay.
To say we were poor is a massive understatement.
The prepayment certificate at that time was around £6oish a year I think, I don't know what it is now, but averaged over 52 weeks would cost less than a pint of milk a day.

We looked at a load of alternatives a while back.

Most had some sort of insurance. The ones I preferred were those that kept government at arms length. They can't be kept entirely out of it - unless you are a laissez faire supporter - because we need to ensure that the system is both comprehensive and affordable. Those on the lowest income generally do not pay. There is a dedicated tax for a safety net.

If it's on a sliding scale like income tax, how about charging more for income tax and ring-fencing the extra money for the NHS?

Hmm, sounds good, but as everyone will have paid in via income tax, how would you feel when you see those that can't be bothered to work getting treatment for free. Very difficult to target the help to those that need and deserve it.
The great thing about the NHS is that it is free for all. We all have the option to go privately (yes I do appreciate that not all can afford it, which is why the NHS should be free)

thatbags,

That kind of system was considered a couple of years ago, but the conclusion was that it would cost more to administer than it would save. There would still be people who would fall between any kind of scheme, just as there are now for all sorts of benefits. Sadly, there are people who won't go to their GP, because they've been made to feel guilty about wasting time, leave problems too long and charging wouldn't help.

Sliding scale, bit like the theory behind income tax.

What about a combination of both those things: people paying as individuals if they can (as well as paying the usual taxes) and people who can't pay just paying taxes (again, if they can/are eligible to pay tax) and getting NHS services feee at the point of receipt? I think that's what jane10 might be getting at.

daphnedill Thank you or those figures, I will have to check with my local private hospital, but I did think you still had to be refereed by your own GP, and I do not want to take up his time. If I were to see my GP privately, it would be outside his NHS surgery hours and would not therefor affect other patients, The very point of going private was not to take up NHS time.