Pay Or Not Pay?

The NHS is free but is seriously overspent by billions of pounds.   Mr David Cameron PM says the 'NHS is first class'.  Others argue that Staffing levels are so low that it is impossible to provide top quality care.  But by charging it would help NHS financial  problems.

Accident and Emergency Departments sees  many patients every day and cost

NHS a great amount of money on a daily basis.

Others argue that there are certain type of people who do not need to to  go A&E Department for their treatment. 

800 GP were asked if patients should be charged £10.00 for their care in A&E Department just only one third of the Doctors said yes.

Should we pay or not pay to be treated in Casualty?

 

«134

Comments

  • It isn't "free", we all help pay for it out of our National Insurance contributions.

     

  • Thanks again Karen 

  • They could just charge extortionate amounts for parking at the hospital. That would put me off going unnecessarily.
  • Don't they do that already?
  • The answer is pefectly simple and is already being implemented - they just close the A&Es. My local one closed a few years ago. The two next nearest are not that far in terms of miles but if you had to get to one in an emergency (kind of the point really) in a hurry during rush hour you probably wouldn't make it in time...

  • As pointed out above, it isn't 'free', we pay taxes to support the NHS.  The government are well aware of the staffing levels, yet they continue to support the 'manager led' structure that has seen secondary care staffing levels on the coal face be reduced to unmanageable and dangerous levels.  

    And shame on the one third of GPs who said A&E care should be paid for (if indeed that stat is correct, which I find hard to believe).  GPs are independent businesses in their own right.  They're a money making exercise and as such, imo, shouldn't be consulted on whether or not any part of secondary care should be paid for.  

  • I think it would be a good start if GPs operated a 7 day service. It's absolutely barmy that they don't.

     

  • Agreed.  There are some who do six days and extended hours, but they're far too few.  Practices are generally run by partners, and partners tend not to want to pay out for the extra staff that would be required to provide a fuller, more up to date, service.  

  • For a moment there, Karen, I thought your post was going to be some sort of petition on behalf of poorly paid actors and actresses who were scratching round for exposure on second rate hospital dramas.

  • Me too, Pudge!

  • A small £10 charge would reduce the number of 'worried well' and frequent attenders/time wasters going to A&E and perhaps deter some of those people who do not take responsibility for their own health. This would relieve pressure on A& E departments a lot, but it would also deter old folks who would rather put up with their pain and save £10.  It's because of this group I suspect no fee will ever be charged.

  • Just flown in from a place where you have to pay to see a GP.

    As for drunks in casualty, they should incur a charge equivalent to the cost of the alcohol estimated to put them there.

     

     

  • Call me cynical but the cat is now out of the bag, and this discussion has started, what will follow is

    1) We must not charge the out of work

    2) Obstacles now removed, good now lets screw the tax payer

    This will only penalise the middle income again

  • It's never going to happen.

    For every 10 drunks and people with health anxiety that probably should pay there's always going to be that one person that is actually having a heart attack, doesn't go to casualty because of the charge and dies a a result.

    Nobody is going to think that's an acceptable level of risk.

  • If it were about fairness, I'd agree with you, but it is about raising money, you cannot raise money from the unemployed and poorest (without re-assessing benefit etc) but you can raise it from the wealthy and middle income groups.

  • A problem with healthcare is there are are lot cof consequential impacts, so for example (this is off the top of my head so don't ask for evidence) people with drug or alcohol dependency issues place a greater burden on A&E services' people with mental health issues can greater general health needs.

    Treat the cause rather than the symptom.

  • Screamapillar wrote (see)

    It's never going to happen.

    For every 10 drunks and people with health anxiety that probably should pay there's always going to be that one person that is actually having a heart attack, doesn't go to casualty because of the charge and dies a a result. Nobody is going to think that's an acceptable level of risk.

    At least not until they put IDS in charge.

  • Screamapillar wrote (see)

    It's never going to happen.

    For every 10 drunks and people with health anxiety that probably should pay there's always going to be that one person that is actually having a heart attack, doesn't go to casualty because of the charge and dies a a result. Nobody is going to think that's an acceptable level of risk.

    If that were the true level of risk, you'd be right, but I'm pretty sure it isn't.  The number of people choosing to go to A&E of their own violition with conditions that would otherwise kill them will almost certainly be far lower than that.

    I'm against charging for A&E, but making up numbers and then stating that those numbers are unacceptable is what politicians are good at.

  • Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

    Just put a charge on any use past the hour of 9pm. Drunks and druggies taken care of.

    I'm sure my 91 year old grandmother would have appreciated that when she was taken to casualty after a late night fall - the one that killed her a few weeks later.

  • Until July 1948 you would have had to pay for all your health care. The very elderly are very aware of this fact.

  • RicF wrote (see)

    Until July 1948 you would have had to pay for all your health care. The very elderly are very aware of this fact.

    Most of us are aware of this fact. I'm not sure what you are trying to say, given that many couldn't afford to pay and that was the entire point of setting up the NHS. 

  • There are lots of things that could be done. GP's surgeries open 7 days a week, as I've already mentioned, would take a fair bit of pressure off A&E.

    Another thing, just off the top of my head, is making prescriptions must cheaper but making fewer people eligible to get them free. At the moment practically nobody pays which is crazy.

    There must be lots of tinkering that can be done which would reap practical and financial benefits before introducing charges for A&E.

    And yes, we could train more doctors but I can see how 6 years training (even without the long hours worked as a junior doctor) would off putting for many.

  • Getting most GP's to work 8am to 8:30am 5 days a week would be a start
«134
Sign In or Register to comment.