16-10-2014 7:48 PM
16-10-2014 8:24 PM
Well so long as we turn the country into an everyone is successful and can afford it country first ,I don't see a problem 🙂
16-10-2014 8:36 PM
As you rightly say the NHS needs to change.
Many years ago when the first sex changes and IVF treatments came on line my Mother reckoned it was time to charge for what she termed voluntary treatments because, in her opinion, we soon wouldn't be able to afford to fund it.
But what do we charge for - the routine or the expensive? Life Style or Life threatening? Who decides which is which?
To me, having children is a lifestyle choice and so no IVF should be funded but to another woman it could literally mean life or death. Pay your money take your choice. No easy answers
However my Mother was brought up in poverty before the 2nd WW. She, and many others, thought her Doctor was a saint because he treated people first and put the payment on the slate for them to be paid when they could. The NHS makes it possible for everybody to seek medical help when they need it - not a bad thought.
16-10-2014 8:37 PM
16-10-2014 8:41 PM
If all National Insurance contributions went to the National Health and those that were not born here had to pay in for 2 years, before they were entitled to free treatment; then it probably would survive. However, not only does it have to contend with the natural population increase of the indigenous people of these Islands and the increase of those too young to work and those past retirement age; being supported by an ever decreasing number of workers ( proportionately )..........but it's also open to a free for all by anybody and everybody who wants to come here for treatment. So it needs to be sorted out, because the way it's going it won't survive.
16-10-2014 8:43 PM
@joamur_gosof wrote:Well so long as we turn the country into an everyone is successful and can afford it country first ,I don't see a problem 🙂
Sorry but I do, there will always be the poor and the disabled.. Have a child(grown up) with health issues, about 10 scrip items a month and without 2 of them he would die. PMI does not cover pre-existing medical conditions, depending on cover it may or may not fund the drugs - that is IF you can afford it. So he would be a charity case? Is that really what we want?
16-10-2014 9:01 PM
16-10-2014 9:35 PM - edited 16-10-2014 9:37 PM
My point was only a starting base and obviously far more complications than that would have to be ironed out. Those too young to work would get free treatment ,obviously, ( although they have not been able to pay into the system ). Those who have retired would get free treatment ( having paid into the system all their working lives ) and those currently working or having NI paid would get free treatment. It's there for all who merit it and I use the word merit reservedly. For those that need it greatly; there are others who have never needed it at all. I personally would rather look at it as an insurance policy, that hopefully I would never need to call upon. Like Car insurance, I don't really want to have a crash to make paying it worthwhile.
16-10-2014 9:54 PM
@evoman3957 wrote:it's also open to a free for all by anybody and everybody who wants to come here for treatment. So it needs to be sorted out, because the way it's going it won't survive.
"Health Tourism" doesn't really touch the sides of the overall NHS budget:
"To put these numbers in context, whether we are referring to £200 million (CCI’s estimate), £20 million (the Government’s official estimate) or £45 million (a figure calculated on the basis of the Government’s internal analysis), we’re talking about no more than 0.15% of the NHS’s overall budget of £104 billion."
https://fullfact.org/factchecks/cost_of_health_tourism_to_the_nhs-28866
."..What did come as a surprise, however, was another group of NHS users who should be paying for treatment, and that’s British expats.
While small in number – the figures the Department of Health uses assumes there may be 65,000 present in England on an average day – they cost health services more per head than anyone else.
Expats, this report suggests, cost £1,449 per head. Visitors here from outside the EEA who’ve been here for less than three months cost £1,000 less, at £449 per head.
Students from outside the EEA cost £713 per head, and migrants who’ve been here more than a year who have come from outside Europe cost £822 per head.
The expat cost is highest because their age tends to be greatest, and they therefore tend to require more complicated and lengthy healthcare."
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/foreign-visitors-owe-nhs-2bn-factcheck/16194
16-10-2014 10:29 PM
I agree about the expats as well, they don't like the Country enough to live in it full time; but soon come running back to it for medical treatment, when the time arises. It would also be interesting to know how many of them stay and die in the other Countries they have chosen to live in, or stay there after their Partners / Wives / Husbands die. Most, I have heard about, want to return back here to end their Days.
17-10-2014 6:51 AM
Mental Health service costs have risen vastly in the last 20 years
Care in the Community is costing far too much and isn't working for a large % of the Patients, compared to the Institutions they replaced (yes they had faults), staff costs dwarf care costs. Carer costs are that high, they can't employ trained psychiatric staff, so the Patients are in limbo. Also means we can't get enough money to Families that do try and care for their sick relatives at home. It may be ok for some but not for all.
It hasn'r worked and needs a drastic overhaul
The above is about Adult care in the Community, the Elderly care system will also only cost more and more as numbers rise
17-10-2014 9:01 AM
@evoman3957 wrote:I agree about the expats as well, they don't like the Country enough to live in it full time; but soon come running back to it for medical treatment, when the time arises. It would also be interesting to know how many of them stay and die in the other Countries they have chosen to live in, or stay there after their Partners / Wives / Husbands die. Most, I have heard about, want to return back here to end their Days.
Hang on Evo, a short while earlier you said "Those who have retired would get free treatment ( having paid into the system all their working lives )" and now you are saying that it's not good enough to have paid in but choose to live out your twilight years elsewhere.
Surely such an insurance policy should cover you anywhere, if you've paid for the service then surely you are entitled to it!
17-10-2014 9:04 AM
Yes Expats. Would think you could quadruple that number easily. They maintain N ddress here, usually at a child's house, they come over at least once a year for dental, eye, health care. Whilst they have, mostly, contributed all their lives they have chosen to retire and spend their pensions(including state, in another "better" country - maybe we can see the logic behind Scottish RESIDENTS having a vote on independance. Then there are the ones travelling who spend exactly the right amount of time in this country to qualify for anything they need whilst renting out their property the rest of the year. They too will have paid in most of their working lives. So do they use the credit they gained, abuse the system or pay for everything.
e.g. We recently had a case in the local papers - retired couple came back here and took jobs as live in carers(paying tax and NI) so one of them could access healthcare. Unfortunately condition is terminal, the patient has been asked to leave hospital, has nowhere to go since live in was for working and they both cannot work, the local authority has basically refused to house them as they currently have no address of their own, they have gone to the local paper saying they should, most people responding were saying they should be housed but a few cynics like me say they have a house elsewhere why cannot they sell or let it to pay for something here, the person not being well enough to travel home. Difficult one isn't it - they have recently paid into the system but they came here for healthcare which they would have been charged for in their adopted country. Right or wrong - I do not know.
Then the health tourists - think there are very many more than are counted as well. There needs to be a simple reporting ststem and a central invoicing point. Doctors haven't time to investigate every patient so pass it onto somebody who does.
Yes it is a bit like an insurance. As children and adults OH and I barely troubled the Doctors at all. However, in the last 10 years OH has had loads of problems which the NHS has(mostly) paid for. My daughter rarely is ill, her daughter is rarely ill, my son was and still is well known at both Doctors and the hospital. He has made up for all the treatment we didn't need. It is swings and roundabouts.
17-10-2014 9:22 AM
@bhgardeners wrote:As you rightly say the NHS needs to change.
Many years ago when the first sex changes and IVF treatments came on line my Mother reckoned it was time to charge for what she termed voluntary treatments because, in her opinion, we soon wouldn't be able to afford to fund it.
But what do we charge for - the routine or the expensive? Life Style or Life threatening? Who decides which is which?
To me, having children is a lifestyle choice and so no IVF should be funded but to another woman it could literally mean life or death. Pay your money take your choice. No easy answers
However my Mother was brought up in poverty before the 2nd WW. She, and many others, thought her Doctor was a saint because he treated people first and put the payment on the slate for them to be paid when they could. The NHS makes it possible for everybody to seek medical help when they need it - not a bad thought.
Treament for accidents and emergencies and issues of physical and mental health should be treated by the NHS in my opinion. I don't believe IVF should be free though perhaps it could be supported by charity. I appreciate I'm fortunate to have two healthy children and the desire for children can be impelling and impact on people's quality of life, but if we are to sustain the NHS we have to make tough choices. Lots of children need adopting and I believe this would be a more socially responsible choice.
I would also send a bill to people who have alcohol related incidents, I was sent a clean-up bill for being sick on a bus many years ago when I was drunk (and quite rightly too) so I see no reason why drunks can't be charged for NHS services.
Sex changes could be a mental health issue and so I have sympathy here; it's not a lifestyle choice in my opinion. And I would ask for a contribution for gastric band treatement; if they afford to gorge on rubbish they can afford to pay towards their treament!
17-10-2014 9:45 AM
@bhgardeners wrote:Yes Expats. Would think you could quadruple that number easily. They maintain N ddress here, usually at a child's house, they come over at least once a year for dental, eye, health care. Whilst they have, mostly, contributed all their lives they have chosen to retire and spend their pensions(including state, in another "better" country - maybe we can see the logic behind Scottish RESIDENTS having a vote on independance. Then there are the ones travelling who spend exactly the right amount of time in this country to qualify for anything they need whilst renting out their property the rest of the year. They too will have paid in most of their working lives. So do they use the credit they gained, abuse the system or pay for everything.
e.g. We recently had a case in the local papers - retired couple came back here and took jobs as live in carers(paying tax and NI) so one of them could access healthcare. Unfortunately condition is terminal, the patient has been asked to leave hospital, has nowhere to go since live in was for working and they both cannot work, the local authority has basically refused to house them as they currently have no address of their own, they have gone to the local paper saying they should, most people responding were saying they should be housed but a few cynics like me say they have a house elsewhere why cannot they sell or let it to pay for something here, the person not being well enough to travel home. Difficult one isn't it - they have recently paid into the system but they came here for healthcare which they would have been charged for in their adopted country. Right or wrong - I do not know.
Then the health tourists - think there are very many more than are counted as well. There needs to be a simple reporting ststem and a central invoicing point. Doctors haven't time to investigate every patient so pass it onto somebody who does.
Yes it is a bit like an insurance. As children and adults OH and I barely troubled the Doctors at all. However, in the last 10 years OH has had loads of problems which the NHS has(mostly) paid for. My daughter rarely is ill, her daughter is rarely ill, my son was and still is well known at both Doctors and the hospital. He has made up for all the treatment we didn't need. It is swings and roundabouts.
It is indeed swings and roundabouts; we pay into the system with the promise we can access it if needed but hope we need it as little as possible. We don't begrudge those who genuinely need to access it a lot because we appreciate we are fortunate to have good health, are happy to provide for those less fortunate and know that one day we may have such a need.
I honestly don't see what the problem is with Expats though, is it a social envy thing? They can afford to live in a nicer place, they choose to spend their money elsewhere.
They would have to pay for treament in an adoptive country because they have not paid contributions to any national health system in that country; so they use the services of the health system that they have paid for!
If you paid for a wedding reception at a social club in Birmingham but then went off to Seville to get married and honemoon in a lovely little spot, what would be your first thought if the manager of the reception venue said "No you can't come back here now for your reception, you chose to go off abroad spending your money over there on a fancy wedding and honeymoon, don't think you can come back here when you feel like it for a reception"?
I'd suggest your first thought would be "but I've paid you for it!"
17-10-2014 10:03 AM
@bookhunter2007 wrote:
@evoman3957 wrote:it's also open to a free for all by anybody and everybody who wants to come here for treatment. So it needs to be sorted out, because the way it's going it won't survive.
"Health Tourism" doesn't really touch the sides of the overall NHS budget:
"To put these numbers in context, whether we are referring to £200 million (CCI’s estimate), £20 million (the Government’s official estimate) or £45 million (a figure calculated on the basis of the Government’s internal analysis), we’re talking about no more than 0.15% of the NHS’s overall budget of £104 billion."
https://fullfact.org/factchecks/cost_of_health_tourism_to_the_nhs-28866
."..What did come as a surprise, however, was another group of NHS users who should be paying for treatment, and that’s British expats.
While small in number – the figures the Department of Health uses assumes there may be 65,000 present in England on an average day – they cost health services more per head than anyone else.
Expats, this report suggests, cost £1,449 per head. Visitors here from outside the EEA who’ve been here for less than three months cost £1,000 less, at £449 per head.
Students from outside the EEA cost £713 per head, and migrants who’ve been here more than a year who have come from outside Europe cost £822 per head.
The expat cost is highest because their age tends to be greatest, and they therefore tend to require more complicated and lengthy healthcare."
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/foreign-visitors-owe-nhs-2bn-factcheck/16194
Actually, reading the channel 4 fact check link doesn't really show a true picture, it would seem to me, as this government NHS link provides a huge list of charge exemptions along with reciprocal agreements with countries who are not necessarily EU members.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/1556/made
Perhaps the government (NHS) could tighten up on getting their money back both from the reciprocal countries and also from those countries where there is no agreement.
17-10-2014 10:13 AM - edited 17-10-2014 10:15 AM
I know retired people ( including expats ) have paid into the system all their working lives ( at least I hope they have ) and as I said, should therefore be entitled to free treatment. However, I guess with them; it's this feeling that, at a time of their lives when they are practically guaranteed to have medical problems ( over one thing or another ) they chose to leave the Country, whose medical services they need so badly, to go and live elsewhere. I agree they have earned the right to choose where they live and how they spend their Money, but as with everything in life.......with choices comes consequences........cause and effect....and all that. Going back to the Car Insurance example, you pay to insure your Car to drive it in THIS Country; OK, most companies allow you a certain amount of cover abroad during that year. However, if you live broad and have an accident; you can't expect to bring your Car back here and have it fixed and paid for by an Insurance Company in THIS Country. Also, doesn't it seem just a little unfair; that expats spend all their money into the coffers of another Country ( including contributing to all it's amenities ) but come back here, when that Country falls short on the one thing that's most important t their age..........Health Care.
17-10-2014 10:33 AM
@evoman3957 wrote:I agree about the expats as well, they don't like the Country enough to live in it full time; but soon come running back to it for medical treatment, when the time arises. It would also be interesting to know how many of them stay and die in the other Countries they have chosen to live in, or stay there after their Partners / Wives / Husbands die. Most, I have heard about, want to return back here to end their Days.
I think you're taking a bit of a generalised opinion on this evo and seem to be referring to the retirement population of ex pats.
Speaking as an ex ex-pat working and living in an EU country for 9 years I contributed both to the country where I was domiciled and also to the UK NI system. At one point during my stay I was given a diagnosis of cancer, I saught treatment from the country I was in and although competent, their approach was very different to that of the UK at the time. I opted to return to the UK and have my treatment there. I financed my return for the long stay but had NHS treatment which I had contributed to and was continuing to contribute to.
There are many working ex pats who contribute to the UK system but who live in other countries and pay their local contributions so please don't think all expats necessarily take advantage of the NHS here.
During my stay abroad I met several elderly retired ex pats who had local hospital treatment and they didn't come running back to the UK to die... Of course I acknowledge some do but imo there's nothing wrong with that if they have already made their contributions.
This government link provides a very long list of who can and who can't access the NHS. You'll probably be a bit surprised by the number of non EU reciprocal countries.
17-10-2014 10:35 AM
17-10-2014 10:44 AM
@evoman3957 wrote:I know retired people ( including expats ) have paid into the system all their working lives ( at least I hope they have ) and as I said, should therefore be entitled to free treatment. However, I guess with them; it's this feeling that, at a time of their lives when they are practically guaranteed to have medical problems ( over one thing or another ) they chose to leave the Country, whose medical services they need so badly, to go and live elsewhere. I agree they have earned the right to choose where they live and how they spend their Money, but as with everything in life.......with choices comes consequences........cause and effect....and all that. Going back to the Car Insurance example, you pay to insure your Car to drive it in THIS Country; OK, most companies allow you a certain amount of cover abroad during that year. However, if you live broad and have an accident; you can't expect to bring your Car back here and have it fixed and paid for by an Insurance Company in THIS Country. Also, doesn't it seem just a little unfair; that expats spend all their money into the coffers of another Country ( including contributing to all it's amenities ) but come back here, when that Country falls short on the one thing that's most important t their age..........Health Care.
It's called freedom of choice evo. I really can't understand why you feel so against these ex pats. If they've reached retirement, brought up a family, paid their taxes, spent money in the UK during those years, worked to support the economy etc etc then why shouldn't they move to another country for their retirement. Many ex pats have private health insurance and if they have Residency in their country of choice - usually an EU one - then there are reciprocal agreements in place for the NHS equivalent and our NHS, so where's the problem?