Jump to content

Public 'prepared' to pay for healthcare


Recommended Posts

http://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/public-prepared-to-pay-for-healthcare/

Am I missing something here? We, the ‘public’ currently pay for healthcare both directly and indirectly through taxation. Whether we pay enough may be debatable, but the way in which our taxes are allocated and spent equally has to be closely scrutinised. Already it has been shown the Island pays considerable amounts for locums whose charges appear to be accepted without challenge. In addition, the health services provided on the Island are only ‘general’ as evidenced by the number of patients who are sent off-island to see medical staff who are experienced in the whole gamut of health conditions and not only the more frequent ones. The position is not helped by the fact that the health service has no formal RTT – referral to treatment metrics (currently 18 weeks in the UK) in place which means that certain of Noble’s specialties can put patients on long waiting lists forcing some patients to go private.

To date there appears to be no manager or politician prepared to grab the health service by the proverbial neck and give it a ‘good shake’ despite trips to ‘centres of excellence’ in other parts of the world.

The conclusion of this most recently announced review, will undoubtedly come up with some valid suggestions, but if we cannot get charges for prescriptions sorted out, what chance have we of getting the health service we deserve? Or is that what we have already – the health service we deserve?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Once again this inept bunch fail to understand just how cost cutting works. Their continued push towards charging for everything and anything proves they are out of their depths and protecting the equ

*MASSIVE POST WARNING* I’m fortunate that through various family members I have a perspective on the NHS that stretches back almost to the very first days in 1948; admittedly mostly a UK perspe

Eddie Teares pension meddling is at the root of many problems ! After having a rant on the telephone to a senior guy in government he said to me " we told him not to do these things " How true th

Posted Images

Both Cannan and Quayle have put forward this "people are prepared to pay" sentiment in separate news releases this week. It's part of the softening up process in advance of the external review proposed by Cannan and endorsed by Tynwald last week. I'll bet Cannan has a wish-list of recommendations at the top of which will be a dilution of the "free at the point of delivery" model. (With apologies) in repeating sentiments I've posted in a separate thread, Ashford has stood aside while "the centre", in the shape of Cannan and Quayle - who, incredibly, did not speak in the Tynwald debate - are now attempting to steer the debate on the future of healthcare. I rather think that the new Health Minister and his equally inexperienced political colleagues on the department will be reduced to the role of bit parts in what will become a long-running soap opera. They will be expected to run the shop on a day to day basis - taking the flak that accompanies that - but I suspect they're not invited to the party in terms of calling the shots on long term strategy.

Edited by Uhtred
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people are prepared to pay, if they have the cash available and they are told that the waiting list on the NHS is so long that it's not even possible to give an estimation of when you can get an appointment / treatment .

If you have private health insurance it's "tax deductible " but if you choose to pay for yourself  at  Nobles there isn't .

Just saying

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Both Cannan and Quayle have put forward this "people are prepared to pay" sentiment in separate news releases this week. It's part of the softening up process in advance of the external review proposed by Cannan and endorsed by Tynwald last week. I'll bet Cannan has a wish-list of recommendations at the top of which will be a dilution of the "free at the point of delivery" model. (With apologies) in repeating sentiments I've posted in a separate thread, Ashford has stood aside while "the centre", in the shape of Cannan and Quayle - who, incredibly, did not speak in the Tynwald debate - are now attempting to steer the debate on the future of healthcare. I rather think that the new Health Minister and his equally inexperienced political colleagues on the department will be reduced to the role of bit parts in what will become a long-running soap opera. They will be expected to run the shop on a day to day basis - taking the flak that accompanies that - but I suspect they're not invited to the party in terms of calling the shots on long term strategy.

It truly is a farce that's in danger of running completely out of control - doing serious damage to the island's health services

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Public are prepared to pay for Fat Farmer's Grants" as well, apparently. As well as all the other myriad of additional taxes that are being lined up on the Governmental conveyor in order to continue to fund the Bloat Obligations.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the charge that HQ and AC and the Civil Service wish to introduce is a charge for visiting a GP. HQ has made enough noise about this, in particular about people failing to attend appointments (was suggested £5). Inconvenient as it is personally I would pay despite the messing around and cost. What I don’t like is charges being levied and then wasted by Government.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again this inept bunch fail to understand just how cost cutting works. Their continued push towards charging for everything and anything proves they are out of their depths and protecting the equally inept civil servants

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 2112 said:

I think the charge that HQ and AC and the Civil Service wish to introduce is a charge for visiting a GP. HQ has made enough noise about this, in particular about people failing to attend appointments (was suggested £5). Inconvenient as it is personally I would pay despite the messing around and cost. What I don’t like is charges being levied and then wasted by Government.

How would that be administered...would you pay at the GP reception counter when you showed up? Would you be turned away if you had forgotten to bring cash or card? I can't see a GP refusing to see a patient. Or would the practice invoice you at the end of the month? (For £5??). Or would DHSC handle the charging and payments to GPs along with their other payments...and if so, how?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, war baby said:

A good starting point might be collection boxes with a notice suggesting a £5 contribution at the door.

So the NHS is staring to become a charity...!

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Jersey one does pay to see a GP (I'm told). Does anyone know if there are exemptions from payment for those in financial hardship/elderly/terminally ill etc. or is it a rigidly applied "thou shalt pay" policy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you expect doctors' surgeries to levy a fee for consultations, then you will also have to factor in the extra staff they will need to deal with the money and the paperwork.

Surely money would be saved if you cut administrative and managerial jobs?

As has already been pointed out, we already pay for our health service. 

The whole point of making it "free" in the first place was to ensure that everyone would be able to see a doctor without worrying about where the money would come from.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good that we're having this review because, obviously, it's not good for the DHSC to overspend its budget and come begging to Tynwald for more money, every year.  Where I think it will fail is when it comes to the crunch point and MHKs have to tell their constituents the facts of life which mostly they don't want to hear, namely, in order to balance the books, they have to either pay more for the service (indirectly through taxation or directly through charges), or alternatively, they have to use less service (take some services out of the NHS and make them wholly private).

For the last couple of months I've been hearing endless talk from politicians (to be fair, mostly UK ones) about how the NHS must be adequately funded to meet patients' "needs".  I have heard almost nothing about whether those "needs" are reasonable, because for a politician to suggest that some patients are over-using the service is effectively to commit political suicide, either side of the water.  But here are a couple of suggestions for reining in those "needs".

"Rule of three."  This is a very sensible suggestion I heard on the radio a few weeks ago from a UK GP, but I haven't heard anyone speak of it since.  Before booking an appointment with your GP do three things: try an over the counter remedy, ask your pharmacist for advice, and look on the internet (a reputable site like NHS Choices).  It's amazing the number of people who don't try self treatment, even for minor things like warts, before visiting the GP.

Anything which you can buy over the counter without a prescription, should not be available on prescription so there's no need to use up an expensive GP appointment to get it.  Examples: wart and verruca treatments (see above), Paracetamol, Ibuprofen, food supplements like Ensure (which is basically soup with lipstick on), vitamins, baby milks, skin creams, bath oils, worming tablets, head lice lotions, hay fever treatments, toe paint for toenail fungus.... I could go on but I won't.  

I don't think making people pay for GP appointments would be workable for all sorts of reasons, but I would like to see persistent abusers of the service being required to pay, perhaps after they have first been sent a warning letter.  There are some "regulars" who abuse the out of hours MEDS and A&E services, and if we charged them, it might not bring much money into the DHSC coffers, but it would give the poor duty doctors a break.    

        

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...