Change free prescriptions to state pension age?

Good idea. I think medical exemption should include asthma and HRT.
However I think med exemption should only apply for that condition.
Eg if you're on thyroxine and develop fir example an ear infection you should not be able to claim med exemption gor that.

I’m 62 and work part time so that I can help with child care and elderly parents. Last time I was ill I needed three courses of steroids, an inhaler two courses of antibiotics. This would have been a major expense on top of not being able to work and only getting statutory sick pay. It’s more cost effective to keep my age group on work and paying taxes. We are also invited to do manage related health screenings. Would you like those stopped as well. What about free eye tests? We should be so appreciative that our heskth can be looked after as we age.

I'm going to disagree with you all , in the nicest way , I'm guessing you all get state pension ( well most of you ) I'm 63 and was my husband's carer as even,though he is also 63 , he has not been able to work for around 5 years due to his health , in that time he has been on 5 different medications a day . When he was under 60 and paying yes he had a certificate which still cost him money.
We had worked full time up to his illness and rarely had
Holidays to pay off our mortgage asap.
Once he was ill we lived off savings and pip and my carers allowance.
This year I have become ill and need 4 different tablets a day , it is an life-long illness and I also get pip , we use our savings to top up . We survive . If we both had to buy the certificates it would be a struggle and more money off our savings .
We dont get state pension until we are 67 , so 4 more years .
We don't get any more help because we have some savings , we've never drank , never smoked , never really had holidays
because we wanted to pay off a mortgage , which we have but at the detriment to other things .
Maybe if we had drank , smoked holidayed , we'd have no savings so qualify for a lot more benefits , but we didn't , so almost have been penalised for being hard working when younger .
So don't deny me free prescriptions as well .

Agree wholeheartedly.

MissAdventure

People are up in arms about the removal of the fuel payment, supposedly on behalf of their less well off friends, but perfectly happy to get money from them in the form of prescription charges.

Incongruity comes to mind.

I agree, and down the line, more will be spent on sorting out those who havent taken their prescribed meds, or have had to stop them, so its false economy, anyway.

Absolutely disagree with this. The ´I am all right Jack’ is very fashionable now.
If we want to cut down on spending, how about cutting down paying from royal palaces from the seven we are paying for. Honestly, health of our population is so important. Remember women were expecting to receive a pension from the age of 60.
Maybe the gov could ask you to pay if you wanted, sure it could be arranged but don’t foist that on other people.

Elie

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.

No one is suggesting you have to pay being as you are already on a state pension. The OP was about 60+ year olds receiving free prescriptions

No I don’t agree at all

Alexander05

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

Alexander Did you read Granny23's post above, where she says that "When free prescriptions for all were introduced in Scotland, it was discovered that the change was cost neutral as there was no longer a need to fund a whole organisation to check eligibility, issue and monitor season tickets etc." ?

What is the use of a free state NHS, if the medication that is prescribed is then too expensive for a pensioner patient on the official state pension to afford it?

I think there are far bigger and better ways to raise funds than to stop free prescriptions for older people.
Stopping the WFA was more understandable, it is fairly recent, not something governments have seen as a long term allowance, and pensioners on benefits will still qualify.
Billions could be raised by closing loop holes in our tax system that allow tax avoidance, and mansion tax is another way.
Indeed our tax system is outdated and clunky I suggest that a complete overhaul would save the country many billions.

People are up in arms about the removal of the fuel payment, supposedly on behalf of their less well off friends, but perfectly happy to get money from them in the form of prescription charges.

It has already been changed to retirement age.
I know this because my husband was advised he was no longer eligible for an annual pre payment certificate when his ran out when he was 60 and a couple of months, but I wasn't advised this (I'll be 60 in January), so did a bit of Google digging and it now says it on government site, so that went through very quietly a few months back.

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.

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

You can be malnourished and obese, by the way.

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

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 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.

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.

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 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.

£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

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

I do not agree.