1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

State of the NHS Today

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by afraser2k, 18 Nov 2006.

  1. anarchist

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 2 Dec 2004

    Posts: 9,702

    Location: Midlands

  2. Sinizterguy

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 8 Mar 2003

    Posts: 1,297

    Location: London

    They NHS was so bad that they decided to blow up the country?
     
  3. anarchist

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 2 Dec 2004

    Posts: 9,702

    Location: Midlands

    Or perhaps they were looking to increase their customer base ;)
     
  4. melbourne720

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 26 Sep 2006

    Posts: 1,945

    Location: West Bridgford

    As some of them were juniors I was wondering if the police had got the motives wrong, and it was about MTAS!
     
  5. Sinizterguy

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 8 Mar 2003

    Posts: 1,297

    Location: London

    Trust me they are busy enough as it stands. There is no need to increase their customer base.

    This is a much more likely suggestion. Their computer applications were so badly designed that most people on these forums could have designed a better one after having been lobotomised.
     
  6. anarchist

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 2 Dec 2004

    Posts: 9,702

    Location: Midlands

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6902463.stm

     
  7. Shackley

    Banned

    Joined: 4 Aug 2003

    Posts: 3,054

    It is probably worth quoting a few more comments from this report:
    It would also be interesting to see how GPs income has fared over a 10 year period, rather than specifically immediately after a substantial pay rise.


    Another enlightening comment is:
    I wonder how much the wizards who negotiated the agreement on behalf of the Government earn and what has become of them over the past few years?


    As an aside, I had dinner with my local GP at the weekend; she told me that two years ago, the Partners had seen a drop in effective income; last year, they received no increase. When I expressed 'surprise', she said that whilst GPs had been given a huge increase, they had also been made responsible for many costs associated with running a practice that had previously been the responsibility of the Health Authority. She did also make the comment that if the massive increases were so attractive, why is it so much easier now to get into Medical College than it was ten years ago and why is it so hard for her practice to hire good quality GPs?

    Incidentally, she is not far off retirement, doesn't complain about her income, loves her job but does feel very stressed by rude, demanding, time wasting, stupid, litigious patients and the never-ending Government demands for more analyses, statistics and targets.


    As with most of these reports, there is far more to the story than anyone can be bothered to report.
     
  8. player

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Sep 2003

    Posts: 2,356

    would someone care to explain to me the systems employed in Italy and France? How do they differ from ours?
     
  9. PikeyPriest

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 21 Jun 2004

    Posts: 1,278

    Med school is probably easier to get in to now purely based on there being more places. In addition to the big unis expanding their intake, many other new schools for specifically medicine/medical science have started in the last few years as the government believes there is a doctor shortage (which doesnt fit with 6k unemployed with no job to do in the UK)
     
  10. Monkey Puzzle

    Soldato

    Joined: 13 Mar 2006

    Posts: 6,443

    They have gone through years of training at medschool and got into large amounts of debt (I'll be over £40,000 in debt when I finish), have gone through years as a junior dr working very long hours on little pay: Don't be fooled by the idea that they're cutting jnr dr hours to comply with the european time directive. The hours worked by jnr drs is now better, but they still have to do many hours over what is declared, which they now don't get paid for.

    Throughout their training they have to also find the time to study for professional exams, the vast majority of which is done in their spare time. Taking these exams costs thousands.

    They have a stressful job with massive responsibility. Others jobs may be stressful, but very few to the point whereby a mistake will cost you your career (NOT job). Under New Labour changes, cases of gross misconduct are tried using panels with laymen on them, and under the principles of civil rather than criminal law (decided on the balance of probability rather than the dr being guilty beyond reasonable doubt).

    When I was doing my GP rotation the drs there worked constantly from 8:15 until past 7pm, bar about 10 minutes for lunch. On top of this they also needed to spend time doing paperwork and on the running of the surgery.

    As it is the NHS is very efficient. It is very good value for the money, despite appalling management wasting money on incredibly poorly implemented ideas like PPI whereby the poorly trained drs cherrypick easy work for far more than it would cost the NHS to perform :rolleyes:.

    Is that not worth more than £50k?
     
  11. Monkey Puzzle

    Soldato

    Joined: 13 Mar 2006

    Posts: 6,443

    Um, that's a bit of an odd statement. The number of people entering medschool is set by the department of health. The number of jobs for drs in the NHS is set by the department of health. So any difference between the numbers can be put down to either

    1) incompetence by the dept of health
    or 2) Not wanting full employment of drs.
     
  12. j00ni

    Soldato

    Joined: 4 Aug 2004

    Posts: 5,622

    Location: Wigan

    I think it's more to do with the govt wanting a higher proportion of uk graduates working in the nhs
     
  13. Klytus

    Hitman

    Joined: 16 Jan 2006

    Posts: 828

    Location: Yorkshire

    I work in the Scarborough & North East Yorkshire NHS trust and Yesterday we were told that 1 in 3 of us are going to lose our jobs.
    The last I heard the trust was £45million in debt hence the reason for the cuts. We are paying the price for the incompetant financial management in the past.
     
  14. frosty03

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 14 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,778

    Location: England

    For the last 10 years the numbers in med school has been increasing. But there has not been a corresponding increase in the number of jobs at the other end. Although the absolute number of doctors will increase, the number of doctors WORKING will be the same, or decrease as a result of job cuts and the working time directive. You see this in trusts and medical schools everywhere.

    There are enough doctors for the population, but there isnt enough money to employ them. Hence those unemployed will gladly move overseas where there are jobs for them. Some would even argue that this is done intentionally to create medical unemployment, to make the profession more "docile". But others say it is just sheer incompetence by the DOH.
     
  15. Monkey Puzzle

    Soldato

    Joined: 13 Mar 2006

    Posts: 6,443

    pretty true, though I'm not sure they 'gladly' go and work abroad....
     
  16. Legoman

    Gangster

    Joined: 4 Mar 2007

    Posts: 114

    Location: Devon

    What about the people who can't afford private health care?

    Why is private health care the only way to go?

    I'm sure that there are also millions of others who don't spend their money on "booze, fags and drugs".

    Do you think that the NHS only caters for people that "don't take responsibilty for their circumstances"?

    What about those millions of unfortunate people that get injured or become ill with cancer, heart disease, dementia, etc., through no fault of their own?
     
    Last edited: 19 Jul 2007
  17. Legoman

    Gangster

    Joined: 4 Mar 2007

    Posts: 114

    Location: Devon

    You seem to have a bizzare notion that the NHS only treats those who "blow all their wages on crap" :confused:

    Do you have enough money to pay, for example, long-term complex cancer treatment or an organ transplant?

    What is an "NHS Contribution"?
     
  18. frosty03

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 14 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,778

    Location: England

    "NHS contribution" is a percentage of National insurance that goes towards the NHS. Right now, you either go with the NHS or go go private, u cannot for example goto an NHS facility and have "private treatment" although i suspect that will shortly change.

    i totally agree it is unfair for those who pay alot of NI, and take responsibility for their health, to be treated the same as others who, DONT pay NI and do not take care of themselves through smoke/booze/etc.... You cannot with a straight face say that these 2 groups should be treated the same. Both should have a degree of basic health care, but both groups should not be entitled to the same level of treatment, since one group works hard and the other doesnt.

    if u think both should be treated the same, then why should any of us bother working (paying NI) or taking responsibility for their own health since there is no disparity or reward for hard graft?
     
  19. daz

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 24,032

    Location: Bucks

    It's rather strange that elsewhere in the world, our National Health Service is rather envied.

    There are a lot of horror stories about the privatised medical system in the USA based upon insurance and drug companies purely looking after their bottom line...
     
  20. frosty03

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 14 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,778

    Location: England

    Cant agree more, unfortunately our leaders seem intent on destroying it, and following the US into privatising healthcare. Maybe that's because most of them have vested interests/shares in healtcare companies poised to make millions....