woggle Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Unbeliever a lot of your posts border on "I earn more so I deserve more" If that's the case then take private healthcare, but don't knock a great system we have just because it's not good enough for you. Think of the lives our healthcare saves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kidorry Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Unbeliever a lot of your posts border on "I earn more so I deserve more" If that's the case then take private healthcare, but don't knock a great system we have just because it's not good enough for you. Think of the lives our healthcare saves. It saved mine so I will never knock it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 [/b] It saved mine so I will never knock it. It's saved a lot but it doesn't make it beyond criticism or improvement. ---------- Post added 31-10-2015 at 15:33 ---------- You believe that adding extra an layers of bureaucracy and forcing the NHS to turn a profit would make your relative's situation any better? As I said earlier, we want our healthcare to match other countries healthcare without paying the same other countries are willing to pay, so something has to give. Unfortunately as you've found out it's the cinderella services that end up suffering. Bang on. We want a better NHS but are arguing the toss over the revenue of a 5p carrier bag on another thread we certainly won't pay more income tax to fund it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted October 31, 2015 Author Share Posted October 31, 2015 Unbeliever a lot of your posts border on "I earn more so I deserve more" If that's the case then take private healthcare, but don't knock a great system we have just because it's not good enough for you. Think of the lives our healthcare saves. I've made it perfectly clear I can't afford to pay twice. I'm not rich. Any healthcare system saves lives. That doesn't mean we're getting a good deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I've made it perfectly clear I can't afford to pay twice. I'm not rich. Any healthcare system saves lives. That doesn't mean we're getting a good deal. Why are you paying twice - the secondary charge you elect to pay for isn't for you. If it isn't for you and you feel responsible to pay, one can assume its for children, surely they were born under the care of the NHS including subsequent innoculations. Your taxes pay for the NHS to be provided/available it isn't a payment for whether you use it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I've made it perfectly clear I can't afford to pay twice. I'm not rich. Any healthcare system saves lives. That doesn't mean we're getting a good deal. Just to be clear why exactly do you feel you are paying twice? Please list the expenditure out of your own pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted October 31, 2015 Author Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Just to be clear why exactly do you feel you are paying twice? Please list the expenditure out of your own pocket. Psychiatrist in under 6 months: £395. Therapy that actually works and you don't have to wait a year for: £50/week (at least). Possibly pharmaceuticals as well: £8.05/month Waiting months for sub-standard treatment is not a viable option when somebody you love is in constant suffering and a danger to themselves. Not everybody can even raise the money, let alone genuinely afford it. I doubt all these statistics about how wonderful the NHS is include people dead by suicide waiting for the NHS to help them. Edited October 31, 2015 by unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Psychiatrist in under 6 months: £395. Therapy that actually works and you don't have to wait a year for: £50/week (at least). Possibly pharmaceuticals as well: £8.05/month Waiting months for sub-standard treatment is not a viable option when somebody you love is in constant suffering and a danger to themselves. Not everybody can even raise the money, let alone genuinely afford it. I doubt all these statistics about how wonderful the NHS is include people dead by suicide waiting for the NHS to help them. Hang on a moment, could you qualify your sub standard treatment statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Psychiatrist in under 6 months: £395. Therapy that actually works and you don't have to wait a year for: £50/week (at least). Possibly pharmaceuticals as well: £8.05/month Waiting months for sub-standard treatment is not a viable option when somebody you love is in constant suffering and a danger to themselves. Not everybody can even raise the money, let alone genuinely afford it. I doubt all these statistics about how wonderful the NHS is include people dead by suicide waiting for the NHS to help them. Weren't you saying that the treatment is 4th best in terms of effectiveness? If it is 4th best isn't this a case of the NHS rationing treatments to the most effective ones? Earlier in the thread you were arguing for strict rationing of other treatments on the NHS so isn't this rationing just an example of what you are actually arguing in favour of? Also, you will never know until the minute before you die whether you paid massively over the odds. You could fall down the stairs tonight and need a year in a spinal injuries rehabilitation unit at massive cost to the NHS. An NHS paramedic could save your life or the life of one of your loved ones tomorrow - how would you put a price on that anyway? I sympathise with your position but we should all realise that not every treatment everybody wants or needs is always going to be available on the NHS. We can't afford that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted October 31, 2015 Author Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Weren't you saying that the treatment is 4th best in terms of effectiveness? If it is 4th best isn't this a case of the NHS rationing treatments to the most effective ones? Earlier in the thread you were arguing for strict rationing of other treatments on the NHS so isn't this rationing just an example of what you are actually arguing in favour of? The NHS treatment offered is the 4th best. After the long waiting period. For £50-70/week you can get the proper treatment. ---------- Post added 31-10-2015 at 19:18 ---------- Hang on a moment, could you qualify your sub standard treatment statement? There are various therapy methods that have some degree of effectiveness for this condition. The NHS only offers the 4th most effective. The difference in success rate between the various treatments is substantial. Edited October 31, 2015 by unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now