Save the NHS!

VeNT said:
I think the real issue is the conflict of interests that the consultants have.
if they let their waiting lists get high enough then the patients are transferred to the local private hospital where the same consultants are paid MUCH MORE per patient.
so it's in their best interests to do as FEW on NHS as poss so they get as MUCH as they can priviate!
The NHS still has to pay, just at the higher private rate!

want to know the best bit?
the private hospital is ON THE SAME SITE, even uses our theatres for 90% of their ops (they don't have enough so use ours!)

THAT is madness.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that, if there was no private care whatsoever, the NHS would do any more work than it does now? Most private work is done during the hours when the NHS is not using the facilities (or at least it is at Derriford). The situation you describe is the result of regulation to prevent the NHS delaying things excessively.

If we had a competitive, patient driven environment, this situation wouldn't arise in the first place as the incentives would be to treat as many people as possible, not ration care to fit budgets.
 
For profit healthcare would be one of the biggest social crimes ever committed, you just have to look at the cost (and thus accessibility) of the US system to realise this.
 
Stag said:
For profit healthcare would be one of the biggest social crimes ever committed, you just have to look at the cost (and thus accessibility) of the US system to realise this.
Click to expand...

But no-one is proposing a US style system, but a European one.

maustin said:
Completely ignored the quantitative study that showed outcomes are good and at a low cost.
Click to expand...

Would you care to go back and read the article again? The study mentions improvement rates and costs. The only mention of overall outcomes concerns one specific group of cancers among men, where we finished fifth overall.

The issue remains that we could save more lives by improving things further, which was exactly the point made by Cameron and Lansley.
 
maustin said:
The recent study I linked showed good results at good cost. Oh who to believe who to believe. I know no one but lets change it anyway!
Click to expand...

Except it didn't, and it only focuses on one specific disease that has had a lot of focus work on it at the expense of other conditions...

How many more people have to die to preserve the ideology of the NHS?
 
Dolph said:
Except it didn't, and it only focuses on one specific disease that has had a lot of focus work on it at the expense of other conditions...

How many more people have to die to preserve the ideology of the NHS?
Click to expand...

And you are certain that these proposed changes will save lives?
 
OldCoals said:
And you are certain that these proposed changes will save lives?
Click to expand...

I'm certain that the theory of copying more successful systems is sound. Whether it will actually improve anything, given the intransigence of staff and systems to change might be a different matter. A fundamental change in attitude is required within our healthcare sector, and that is always tough.

I'm also certain that sticking with the system that has continually failed and isn't in use anywhere else in the world with good outcomes will lead to more unnecessary deaths.
 
Dolph said:
But no-one is proposing a US style system, but a European one.
Click to expand...

Rubbish - this is following exactly the textbook procedure for tearing down a socialised service and replacing it with a for-profit one. Introduce for-profit competition on an uneven playing field, ensuring that the socialised service can't compete, then point this out and allow the for-profit competition to take even more of the socialised service's market. Lansley and Cameron aren't creating a system where social and for-profit healthcare providers co-exist and develop synergies as in Europe, this is the first step on the road to a US-style healthcare system. Once the NHS has gone it will never be replaced.

This is exactly how the Royal Mail is being taken down. Just look at the "service modernisations" the Royal Mail has undergone recently - we used to have two mail deliveries a day, now we have one delivery every other day. Remind me how exactly this "choice" has benefited us consumers? Has the price of a stamp come down?
 
Can we afford the NHS now? People live longer, greater population etc.

My family have private health care, so the idea of paying is something I'm comfortable with.

Reading some of the articles about standards of patient care is enough to make me question how much of a future the NHS has. Not sure where it's all gone so wrong...
 
Dolph said:
I'm certain that the theory of copying more successful systems is sound. Whether it will actually improve anything, given the intransigence of staff and systems to change might be a different matter. A fundamental change in attitude is required within our healthcare sector, and that is always tough.

I'm also certain that sticking with the system that has continually failed and isn't in use anywhere else in the world with good outcomes will lead to more unnecessary deaths.
Click to expand...

And there lies the problem with theory.

I note that you are already placing the blame on the staff.
 
So because it might not work, we should never try.
In that case why do you lot agree with throwing more and more money at it. Same principle applies.
Other systems clearly work better, trying to copy them is no bad thing..


As for trying to privatise it and introduce an American system. That isn't what is happening. Really just stop that, it's silly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom