Change free prescriptions to state pension age?

“Children have malnutrition”, I think a lot of children are overweight, even obese

Mt61

“Children have malnutrition”, I think a lot of children are overweight, even obese

That’s going to cause a lot of health problems down the line

But healthcare being privitised and child poverty has got nothing to do with the isuue. We are merely talking about people between 60 and retirement age being asked to pay for prescriptions.

If longevity goes down, then of course average time drawing a pension will fall and that will change the problem.

I don’t see longevity as the problem. It is the way the pension works that is the problem. Everyone should be paying more, rather than getting less or taking longer to qualify.

A start has been made to include all workers in an additional pension, and that should be extended to all adults who could work if they chose to ie everyone who is able-bodied and not in a necessary caring role. Minimum wage should be high enough to cover payments and allow workers a decent standard of living so nobody can’t afford to pay. That way everyone paying in now will be covered in their retirement. In the meantime custom and practice should be honoured and those who have paid already should be able to retire as expected - it’s not our fault that governments have been short-sighted. They need to find a way to plug any gaps their mismanagement of the scheme has created, not pass the problem onto those who have worked and contributed all our lives.

But Doodledog the problem with that, as so many people, will tell you, is that some people are poor and will not be able to afford it! It is the same with every change anyone suggests, sooner or later all change is decried because of the 'the poor'

Please do not get me wrong, I understand the problems that poverty can cause. But the solution is not using their poverty to stop any sensible changes in everything from education to taxation that in the long run would help everyone, rather the solution is to design schemes ' the poor', rather than individuals with names and jobs and lives as various as ours to reach a decent standard of living.

There is also the question of the price of drugs. Some cost pence (a private prescription for simple antibiotics is often cheaper than the NHS fee) and some thousands of pounds.
Most of this is caused by the profiteering of drug companies.

The whole system needs an overhaul, as do many other things in the UK.

I had friends who worked at the prescription pricing office. They said if the price of drugs etc were included on the prescription people would be appalled. Some of these items are extremely expensive and many people are oblivious and take it for granted. So yes, I do agree with moving it to 66 (current pension age). We should be more grateful for what we have and get.

There will need to be excemptions, though.

I agree, it should align with pension age. I also agree that the real costs should be made known, I am prescribed 2 diabetes meds that have a cost of over £500 a month, On the diabetes forum I see many Americans who would benefit as I do but can't afford it

I agree that 60 for free prescriptions is unnecessary. Post state pension age yes free.
A free prescription for those on a salary isn't right . As has been stated the 'Season ticket' takes a large burden off those who need regular medication.
And for those who refuse to take up benefits to which they are fully entitled.... well they're very foolish.

M0nica

I agree - for all medication, once you start having exceptions it all gets too complicated and every one says their drug is 'special'

If you need a lot of medication you can get a presciption 'season ticket'. £32 for 3 months, £114.50 a year and a special rate for HRT www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/prescriptions/save-money-with-a-prescription-prepayment-certificate-ppc/

Free prescriptions are also issued for things like stoma supplies, which are hugely expensive and are already monitored and limited. Why would you want to make those peoples’ lives any more difficult than they already are ? Given that stoma of one kind or another is usually a result of cancer or other substantial disability, it mens that those people are already likely to be facing financial challenges. There aren’t that many health conditions which qualify for free prescriptions, but for those that are there’s usually a good reason for it, so let’s not pick on the most vulnerable to shoulder the responsibility of the financial recklessness of others.

Maybe instead of looking at our prescriptions in England maybe Scotland ought to start paying for theirs along with University charges. It seems a little unfair

I agree. Someone on a high salary aged between 60 and 66 should not be receiving free prescriptions. The country can't afford it

I do not agree.

Pammiel £2.00 is not much, where there are problems of poverty that should be addressed through benefits, not the NHS

£2 would hardly make a dent in prescription charges, but it would make a dent in someone's state sickness benefit, if they were unable to work and in need of medication for a few months

I know a young person with cystic fibrosis who had to pay for as many a 20 different prescription items each month. Had this person been too ill to be in ft education, work or training etc they would have had to start paying at age 16! Without these medications they would have died. All the prescriptions became free of course when they developed diabetes on top of everything else. However, someone who is living with only diabetes will also get free prescriptions for all items, even if they are earning a good wage (Theresa May has diabetes and would not have had to pay). There are exemptions for certain state benefits of course, but if a teenager on very limited income has to pay for prescriptions why shouldn't pensioners? OK, as was mentioned earlier in the thread you can buy an annual payment cert for about £2 a week (£114.50pa), but the point is that the system as it currently stands is unfit for purpose and it's not just the over 60s and pensioners who have issues.

No, I don't agree, or I think it should match with personal circumstances (which would not be cost effective to monitor). I remember one of the joys of reaching 60 was not having to pay for my prescriptions any more.

I think there needs to be a wholesale government investigation into the pharmaceutical industry and the blatant profiteering that goes on. And, I suspect, the deliberate holding back of certain meds when they become the "must have" drug, thus forcing prices up.

Just like the energy sector, the drug companies give every appearance of operating a cartel. These greedy institutions are responsible for draining the NHS - not the sick, the disabled and the dying.

I tried to tell my doctor not to prescribe me paracetamol as I was happy to pay the cost and she pointed out it needs to be on my medical records that I’ve been prescribed it as a long term treatment as should anything happen to me the doctor treating me would know what I am being treated for and what medication is working for my condition. Sometimes it’s a necessity and not someone trying to avoid paying for medication.

Doodledog

I don’t see longevity as the problem. It is the way the pension works that is the problem. Everyone should be paying more, rather than getting less or taking longer to qualify.

A start has been made to include all workers in an additional pension, and that should be extended to all adults who could work if they chose to ie everyone who is able-bodied and not in a necessary caring role. Minimum wage should be high enough to cover payments and allow workers a decent standard of living so nobody can’t afford to pay. That way everyone paying in now will be covered in their retirement. In the meantime custom and practice should be honoured and those who have paid already should be able to retire as expected - it’s not our fault that governments have been short-sighted. They need to find a way to plug any gaps their mismanagement of the scheme has created, not pass the problem onto those who have worked and contributed all our lives.

... it’s not our fault that governments have been short-sighted.

I don't think it is short-sightedness; governments have all the data, stats, and information, so must be well aware of our "ageing-population" as we are sometimes referred to - almost as if we are some surprise element that has suddenly popped-up on a memo from a civil servant.

The issue is doing-something-about-it which would involved making those "tough decisions" that governments always warn us about when they've already been elected.

However, informing the electorate prior to an election that they might have to pay an additional 1p or 2p / £1 (for example) does not win votes, so parties defer, or, as it's commonly known, kick the can down the street or the ball into the long grass until it becomes a major problem leading to those notorious "black holes" with the resultant claim that pensioners' benefits are no longer affordable. That also has the desired effect of divide-and-rule... intergenerational conflict. So we then blame each other, and then all the misinformation circulates; how pensioners are the rich generation with big houses, blah, blah, and the young want it all now, blah, blah- letting the politicians off the hook.

Of course, there is also the matter of Corporate greed, with the ever widening gap between the rich (some very rich) and the poor, but that's a discussion for another time.

What do we pay governments for, if not to deal with the economy among other matters? Perhaps these 'black holes' and 'tough-decisions' are an indicator that they have not and are not doing the job properly, rather than the fault of the electorate who pay their taxes and insurance contributions that are set for them by these governments?

We all know that the economy is not run like a household budget, but in that respect, the treasury could maybe take a leaf out of Mr and Mrs Average's accounting principles, because many of them know how to carefully budget ahead.

I'm not on any, thank fully (62) but no I don't agree!!

You can be malnourished and obese, by the way.

Why only asthma and HRT medication?Type 1 diabetics,cancer patients and sufferers of heart disease are surely as deserving of subsidised medicine.

If I had to pay for prescriptions for myself and my husband, assuming that is is £11.00 a time, this would cost £44 for me and £77 for my husband. We are both pensioners who just get state pensions, me a full pension, my husband 75% pension. We are just about managing to eat and heat, if we had to pay for prescriptions, we might as well roll over and die.