NHS

I see trump's been trying to get in on the act again, tweeting about the NHS march at the weekend.
Corbyn put him right.

twitter.com/jeremycorbyn

In fact, when you think about it, fewer than half the Labour MPs have, so how about asking them again, nicely.

www.parliament.uk/edm/2017-19/660

149 signatures.

Some have. The only Labour members who haven't are Ben Bradshaw and Diana Johnson, so anyone in their constituencies needs to ask them.
One SNP, Lisa Cameron, hasn't.
No Tories have.

Why haven't Sarah Wollaston and the rest of the Health Committee signed the EDM?

Apart from the fact there's going to be a judicial review, I don't understand how the first ACO can start in April when the inquiry isn't hearing oral submissions until February and March. Baffled.

On 1 April 2018 the first Accountable Care Organisations will be introduced into England’s NHS. The NHS and Local Authorities take care of people when they are at their most vulnerable. Changes to the services they need should be the subject of careful scrutiny by parliament and other statutory bodies.
The government is considering bringing forward secondary legislation to make the changes possible. The Chair of the Health Select Committee has called for a pause in implementation subject to her committee reporting on developments to date.
An Early Day Motion 660 has also been laid before the House of Commons requesting full scrutiny and debate of these very important issues.
Carillion’s collapse tragically underlines the serious consequences that can arise from outsourced contracts for public services.
The history of the development of Accountable Care in England and the documents issued by the Department of Health and NHS England are extensive and complex. We offer this paper as a guide to decision-makers and other
interested parties to make sense both of this complexity
and of the real challenges that have arisen from the implementation of these changes.

From the government's paper on ACOs. It makes it sound like a fait accompli, a bit like Brexit.

www.crowdjustice.com/case/jr4nhs-round3/

"And finally, the JR4NHS team has won a fantastic concession from NHS England and the Department of Health in the form of a full national consultation on the introduction of ACOs. They have also been given the go-ahead from the judge to proceed with the JR. However, the judge has not awarded cost-capping for the JR on the grounds that JR4NHS have shown that they are able to crowdfund. It is shocking that the judge has not agreed to cap the costs. So, it is possible that the JR will not proceed on cost grounds which would be a gross miscarriage of justice in itself. We would urge anyone who has not yet contributed to do so."

This is disgraceful. A judge could have capped the costs for the group taking Hunt to court to try and save the NHS, but has decided not to, because the group has shown it can crowdfund.
Justice relies on crowdfunding.
The case wouldn't have got so far if it wasn't for crowdfunding, but they have to beg for even more money to try and stop the NHS being privatised.

Same here, Lazigirl. However, I did my best by donating some money so someone could represent me.

What a brilliant turnout, wish I could have been there. Pity the Government of the day hasn't a good record of taking notice of demos.

www.itv.com/news/2018-02-03/thousands-set-to-join-fix-the-nhs-rally-demanding-government-action-to-deal-with-crisis/

It's on ITV news.

Labour Party has a massive presence on the Save our NHS march.

Expect to see no coverage on the bbc.

Rationing essential treatments and refusing non essential ones has been practised in the NHS for some time. It is becoming increasingly difficult to access hip and knee, cataract surgery etc. and GPs have very little say in referrals these days. All referrals, unless urgent are scrutinised by a third party to decide if they meet the ever strict criteria. I suppose it's ok to philosophise about deserving/undeserving patients unless it is you or those close to you affected.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tens-thousands-march-fix-nhs-11962685

Good banners here.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-corbyn-sends-heartfelt-message-11962925

The government has abandoned A&E waiting times on the day that the NHS march is on.
Do you think they want to bury the news?

Some could argue that smokers and drinkers pay more in tax than others therefore, if they need extra help from the NHS, they have paid for it anyway.

The trouble with say identifying smokers as having decided to self inflict disease and illness on themselves you are not taking into account so many other variables, not least questioning whether tobacco should be sold in the first place. Cultural practices etc.

If a doctor decides you are ill enough to go to hospital and have an operation, you definitely need it, don't you?
If you are given medication to stop you dying, you definitely need it, don't you?

Most definitely, but Esspee was questioning what should be treated and I was wondering about the difference in definition between 'need' and 'want'.

Save our NHS march today

If a doctor decides you are ill enough to go to hospital and have an operation, you definitely need it, don't you?
If you are given medication to stop you dying, you definitely need it, don't you?

You have to let somebody define need, and not someone who stands to benefit from privatisation of the NHS.

"If people are not intending to alter their lifestyles to comply with medical advice why treat them?" Well one reason might be that medical advice changes constantly, and it is hard to keep up.

Who is going to make these decisions about who to treat and why? Different people will have their own particular bandwagon like smoking, drinking, driving cars, playing dangerous sports, living too long..... the list could go on and on.

The NHS should be for all of us, with no value judgements because people will have different values.

How do we define need?

Because the NHS was built on being free at the point of need?

I do feel we really do have to bite the bullet and reduce non essential treatments. We spend millions on IVF, (being childless is not an illness), millions on abortions, (except for rape - the mother and father should pay) millions on drug addiction (let them go cold turkey), millions on prolonging life for those with no quality of life, millions on pen pushers instead of medical staff, millions on multiple health boards which could be combined.
Why do we waste resources on people who will not give up smoking and have lung problems as a result, why do we treat drunks when their problems are self inflicted? Why operate on the morbidly obese when the chances of failure are so much greater.
If people are not intending to alter their lifestyles to comply with medical advice why treat them?
Medical advances mean that more and more expensive treatments will become available in the future, we have to draw the line somewhere.