British Hopitals: Patients check- in but they don't check-out

[Fisher]

or you could also pay to have your wisdom teeth removed in the UK.

In which case it would not be free and this is all about how horrible it is that meth addicts do not get free dentures in the US and other such non-sense. If it an emergency, you get treated regardless of your ability to pay or they have to maintain you and find somebody else to treat you. We have free clinics, and sliding scale clinics, and a multitude of services for the poor. What liberals do not like is that some crack addict doesn't get a private room with a plasma TV for free, and then blame those who do get good treatment for the deaths of those too damn lazy to take advantage of all the healthcare that is already available to them for free. People can guzzle sodas and sweets and fill themselves with fried food and never go to the doctor until they have a stroke or heart attack and suddenly it is supposed to be the fault of other people that they had a stroke or heart attack. It is all BS.

 

[Higgins86]

In which case it would not be free and this is all about how horrible it is that meth addicts do not get free dentures in the US and other such non-sense. If it an emergency, you get treated regardless of your ability to pay or they have to maintain you and find somebody else to treat you. We have free clinics, and sliding scale clinics, and a multitude of services for the poor. What liberals do not like is that some crack addict doesn't get a private room with a plasma TV for free, and then blame those who do get good treatment for the deaths of those too damn lazy to take advantage of all the healthcare that is already available to them for free. People can guzzle sodas and sweets and fill themselves with fried food and never go to the doctor until they have a stroke or heart attack and suddenly it is supposed to be the fault of other people that they had a stroke or heart attack. It is all BS.

If it is an emergency they will treat you in the US and then they will give you a lovely bill at the end of it and that is why in 2007 62 percent of all bankruptcies were medical related. As I mentioned before our system works for us but yours clearly isn't working for you hence the heated debate that has been going on for the last 5 years.


Health care related bankruptcy is on the rise, study says

 

[Fisher]

If it is an emergency they will treat you in the US and then they will give you a lovely bill at the end of it and that is why in 2007 62 percent of all bankruptcies were medical related. As I mentioned before our system works for us but yours clearly isn't working for you hence the heated debate that has been going on for the last 5 years.


Health care related bankruptcy is on the rise, study says

Then you still do not have to pay it--that is what bankruptcy is. Hell if you are poor you don't even have to declare bankruptcy. You can just let them rack up judgment after judgment after judgment that they will never collect a dime on. Doesn't mean you did not get treated.

 

[Higgins86]

Then you still do not have to pay it--that is what bankruptcy is. Hell if you are poor you don't even have to declare bankruptcy. You can just let them rack up judgment after judgment after judgment that they will never collect a dime on. Doesn't mean you did not get treated.

Just destroys your credit which in the US can be death sentence by itself.

 

[Manc Skipper]

The US doesn't give you followup and maintenance to prevent you ending up in the ER again at the next crisis All US emergency care is just that, you're patched up declared fit for discharge, then a taxi drops you off back on skid row in a hospital gown.

Homeless dumping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

L.A. poised to go after Las Vegas hospital in patient-dumping cases - Nevada Patient Busing - The Sacramento Bee

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Well, having no access to food doesn't matter when judging how good food tastes to those who do.

As for healthcare, I am correct. If you want everybody to have access to witch doctors, blood-letters, and the like over letting those who have access actually getting what they are being charged for then feel free. Move to the UK if you are not there and wait a year and a half to get your wisdom teeth out for free if you so desire. I personally don't mind paying to be able to see a dentist the same day if its an emergency and don't feel a bit guilty about it.

But having no food does say something about the quality of life in the country. I'd rather have something that's imperfect than not have it at all.

I see you still are trying to ignore my point about our staggering infant mortality rate.

Also, I have personally used the NHS, and I found it to be faster and more efficient than most American hospitals.

 

[PeteEU]

I see you still are trying to ignore my point about our staggering infant mortality rate.

Give it time, the usual suspects will come and say it is because America has a lot of black and latino people and that other nations murder babies under 20 weeks, where as the US saves them... which is bull**** but hey! (you can almost count the amount of babies who survived under 22 weeks on one hand.. world wide).. Thase are the usual excuses when someone points out high infant mortality rates.

 

[Homer.]

In general I go privately, mainly since I don't get pretty ill very often and don't break any limbs, ideally I would Always go private since I feel the quality is better, however I would use the NHS if I had to. Its an ideal service, however it is run shoddily and is very bureaucratic.

Bureaucratic?? It's the 6th most efficient healthcare system in the world (ahead of the US).

 

[Homer.]

Well, having no access to food doesn't matter when judging how good food tastes to those who do.

As for healthcare, I am correct. If you want everybody to have access to witch doctors, blood-letters, and the like over letting those who have access actually getting what they are being charged for then feel free. Move to the UK if you are not there and wait a year and a half to get your wisdom teeth out for free if you so desire. I personally don't mind paying to be able to see a dentist the same day if its an emergency and don't feel a bit guilty about it.

Clearly you've never used the NHS.
And waiting a year and a half to get wisdom teeth out?? Not true, I think I had an appointment within a week or two (not an urgent removal)
I also saw an NHS dentist the same day when I got toothache, so what?

 

[Spriggs05]

Bureaucratic?? It's the 6th most efficient healthcare system in the world (ahead of the US).

From my experiences it takes 30 minutes to get seen by a doctor when the waiting room has 1 other group in the room.
Examples of NHS bureaucracy: BBC News - MPs condemn poor value from hi-tech equipment

"A modern NHS should not allow 50% of people who have a stroke to wait more than 24 hours for a scan," she said.

One in four NHS staff is now a bureaucrat | Mail Online

Huge increases in NHS red tape have been revealed by official figures showing that an unprecedented one in four health workers is now a bureaucrat.

Despite Government promises to cut back on bureaucracy, 188,530 of the 837,000 staff employed by the health service are managers, administrators and clerks with no direct involvement in patient care.

 

[Serenity]

Eh, Government run health care is not without some problems but people that require urgent life saving non elective surgery are treated as a priority and we don't have hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people going bankrupt every year due to ridiculous medical bills.

Down under, we basically have a two tier system. We all pay into the "free health" scheme but if we want to go private we can. It is the best of both worlds. You don't have to be rich to use the private system. A family cover will cost you around $60.00 per week and a single person can obtain cover for around $25 per week. I don't have to worry about going broke to pay my medical bills ever. I don't have to worry that if i get sick, my Insurance Company will decide they don't want to pay my claim. I choose the level of cover i want and pay the appropriate premium for the level of cover selected. The choice is mine. Not the health funds.

Re the whole US is better - argument - Coming from a Country that has a working UHC scheme, i don't understand such anger and animosity at the thought of the US government having some control over your health care. It's not like what you have now is working or anything special. It's a disgrace. While you are so hell bent on shouting down the public option, all you are doing is lobbying to keep pouring money into the pockets of insurance companies who have been the ones rationing healthcare as you see it today. The health insurance companies do not care about you, if they did they would not focus so much of their time trying to get out of paying claims and compromising yours and your families health while premiums keep increasing.

At the end of the day, it's really not much good having some of the best health care facilities and Doctors in the world (which the US do), if people don't have access to it in a timely and afforable manner.

 

[PeteEU]

From my experiences it takes 30 minutes to get seen by a doctor when the waiting room has 1 other group in the room.
Examples of NHS bureaucracy: BBC News - MPs condemn poor value from hi-tech equipment

Waiting times always varies depending on time of day and year and if there is more urgent patients. I have had experiences of waiting several hours in Denmark to not waiting at all. The time I had to wait 3 hours in A&E, it was because of lots of urgent patients... a car accident and such. I have heard of 12 hour waits due to lack of doctors in Denmark, but they are rare and often due to a **** up by administrators not putting enough staff.

One in four NHS staff is now a bureaucrat | Mail Online

Well it is the Mail ...

But lets take their numbers at face value. Fact is that for every patient there is a lot of paperwork. Now my question to you is.. would you rather have the nurses and doctors doing this paperwork or a bureaucrat?

I am saying this because we have had the same debate in Denmark, and it was found out that doctors and nurses had a lot of paperwork which could be done by a bureaucrat instead and hence freeing the doctor and nurses up on the ward. So they started hiring a secretary or two for each ward and department to take care of all the paperwork involved in your care.. and it actually worked, but of course it also meant that the bureaucrat part of the total workers shot up.

Now bureaucrats become less the more electronic the system becomes.. but as you should know, the NHS system is far from modern since the latest attempt to make it more digital .. basically failed badly and cost millions.

 

[Manc Skipper]

From my experiences it takes 30 minutes to get seen by a doctor when the waiting room has 1 other group in the room.
Examples of NHS bureaucracy: BBC News - MPs condemn poor value from hi-tech equipment



One in four NHS staff is now a bureaucrat | Mail Online

I've never waited more than 20 minutes at my GP, and that day somebody collapsed outside the building, and he tended them till the ambulance arrived.

As for bureaucrats, a ward sister/charge nurse is classed as a manager these days, and every ward now has a ward clerk to relieve the insufficient number of nurses of incessant form-filling, which takes them away from care provision. That said, the NHS has been through a dozen reorganisations in my working life, and that in itself leads to more bureaucracy. There was a time when NHS administration costs ran at about 4-5% of budget. These days, it might be nearer the 10% common in the private sector.
The Daily Heil isn't the most reliable source, especially on the NHS, they railed against it's formation and hated it ever since.

 

[Spriggs05]

There was a time when NHS administration costs ran at about 4-5% of budget. These days, it might be nearer the 10% common in the private sector.

Picture isn't mean to look like that, the Red is NHS (£119 Billion, 18% of Budget)

The Daily Heil isn't the most reliable source, especially on the NHS, they railed against it's formation and hated it ever since

I thought it was the daily fail? Either way its a source, just an incredibly easy source to discredit.
Then again there are worse sources, like the Sun/Daily Star. Maybe the Mirror.

 

[BretJ]

Don't have to worry about checking into American hospitals if u don't have insurance.

Somewhat true if you have non-life threatening, non-emergency issues. Otherwise, not true at all. U.S. Hospitals are required to provide emergency care regardless of insurance or lack of.

 

[BretJ]

I've never waited more than 20 minutes at my GP, and that day somebody collapsed outside the building, and he tended them till the ambulance arrived.

As for bureaucrats, a ward sister/charge nurse is classed as a manager these days, and every ward now has a ward clerk to relieve the insufficient number of nurses of incessant form-filling, which takes them away from care provision. That said, the NHS has been through a dozen reorganisations in my working life, and that in itself leads to more bureaucracy. There was a time when NHS administration costs ran at about 4-5% of budget. These days, it might be nearer the 10% common in the private sector.
The Daily Heil isn't the most reliable source, especially on the NHS, they railed against it's formation and hated it ever since.

Medical care there is pretty much the same way here. It's all location, location, location. My mother-in-law lives in Oxfordshire and has waited over 6 months to see a pain management specialist as there is currently only one to serve the area. (One has left and the other is on maternity leave). One niece had to wait approx. a year for knee surgery and another a couple months to get a diagnosis that the tumor in her eye was not malignant.

My point is that even here in the U.S., I have had good and bad care. Unlike many other countries, I can choose to go somewhere else. (Yes, I know you can as well in the U.K. But the options are much more limited unless you have connections)

As a side point, my wife worked in the NHS as a Physio for quite a few years. Out of her entire class of PT's, not a single one is still practicing in the U.K. Most have left to practice in other countries or have left the profession. I would imagine that could be the same for every other medical profession as well. You sometimes get what you pay for....

 

[PeteEU]

(Yes, I know you can as well in the U.K. But the options are much more limited unless you have connections)

No the issue is if you can afford it, not connections. There are plenty private hospitals in the UK where you can get the treatment faster but for a price. And if you dont like that, then choose a French, German, or as many are now days... Spanish private hospital. Just because the UK has UHC, does not mean there is no choice.

As a side point, my wife worked in the NHS as a Physio for quite a few years. Out of her entire class of PT's, not a single one is still practicing in the U.K. Most have left to practice in other countries or have left the profession. I would imagine that could be the same for every other medical profession as well. You sometimes get what you pay for....

The lack of nurses and doctors is a problem everywhere. But saying that, the UK has more nurses and doctors per 100.000 people than the US according to the latest numbers. In fact the US has some of the lowest numbers of all industrial nations (hell even Mongolia has more doctors per 100k people), so the idea that doctors and nurses move to other countries for money is not exactly justified by those numbers.

The problem with nurses and more and more doctors, is that it is becoming more and more female, which is not bad per say, but does offer up certain problems. These nurses and doctors at some point will want children, and some quit the profession all together to raise kids and at best they have a few months, but more like half a year to a year off. And if they have multiple children, then that adds up. I remember when I was working at a Danish hospital in my youth, that wards always had one or more nurses off on maternity leave. Add into this the money issue, and you have a drain in people, slow but surely. And as for doctors, the biggest issue here is that you need to go to school for so long to qualify. I also think personally shows like ER, Saint Elsewhere and such shows, have had a bad influence on recruitment since they often show young doctors struggling, with very very long hours and a lot of stress.. which may or not be true, but it is not the best recruiting tool. I for one, would not like to not only be in school for 5-7 years, and then X years as an intern or whatever they are called with 30+ hour days and stress all the time because if you did not preform, then you would not continue at the hospital and all that.

But in the end, considering what the British pay for the NHS, they get universal healthcare and have more doctors and nurses than the US .. and at almost half the price...

 

[BretJ]

No the issue is if you can afford it, not connections. There are plenty private hospitals in the UK where you can get the treatment faster but for a price. And if you dont like that, then choose a French, German, or as many are now days... Spanish private hospital. Just because the UK has UHC, does not mean there is no choice.



The lack of nurses and doctors is a problem everywhere. But saying that, the UK has more nurses and doctors per 100.000 people than the US according to the latest numbers. In fact the US has some of the lowest numbers of all industrial nations (hell even Mongolia has more doctors per 100k people), so the idea that doctors and nurses move to other countries for money is not exactly justified by those numbers.

The problem with nurses and more and more doctors, is that it is becoming more and more female, which is not bad per say, but does offer up certain problems. These nurses and doctors at some point will want children, and some quit the profession all together to raise kids and at best they have a few months, but more like half a year to a year off. And if they have multiple children, then that adds up. I remember when I was working at a Danish hospital in my youth, that wards always had one or more nurses off on maternity leave. Add into this the money issue, and you have a drain in people, slow but surely. And as for doctors, the biggest issue here is that you need to go to school for so long to qualify. I also think personally shows like ER, Saint Elsewhere and such shows, have had a bad influence on recruitment since they often show young doctors struggling, with very very long hours and a lot of stress.. which may or not be true, but it is not the best recruiting tool. I for one, would not like to not only be in school for 5-7 years, and then X years as an intern or whatever they are called with 30+ hour days and stress all the time because if you did not preform, then you would not continue at the hospital and all that.

But in the end, considering what the British pay for the NHS, they get universal healthcare and have more doctors and nurses than the US .. and at almost half the price...

All good points. My point was that unless you have the resources, it can be very difficult to seek care elsewhere within the NHS. My wife did some work part time with a private physio practice in Bury St. Edmunds and while they did some pro-bono work, the typical client had no qualms paying for the care. Again, you get what you pay for.

You bring up the TV serials. Is the hard work and effort rewarded? I would suspect that the reason it is becoming more woman centric is that the NHS offers maternity benefits and such that allow them to do just as you say. It is a safe, secure job for them. No risks and they get to have a family and career. Why work in the private sector where pay and benefits is largly based on performance and value to the business? (yes, with all the benevolent reasons to be a medical professional, someone still has to pay for the services\materials\facilities\benefits). In addition, the NHS offers a level of insulation to the repercussions of poor performance, in the way of legal action, that is not available to the private practitioners (unless things have changed in the last few years).

 

[PeteEU]

All good points. My point was that unless you have the resources, it can be very difficult to seek care elsewhere within the NHS.

Yes and.. how is that any different than in a private system? If you dont have the funds, or insurance, then you are pretty much screwed. Difference is, that in the NHS you might have to wait a week or two, but you will get the care. Now if you have the money, then you can pay your way out of the line in the private sector.. nothing wrong with that. That is your choice.

You bring up the TV serials. Is the hard work and effort rewarded?

There is a difference between hard work and outright abuse. Working 30 hours straight is not hard work, but irresponsible, abusive and dangerous for patients and the doctors and that is what these TV series show. Yes it is a tv show, and might be "more dramatic" than factual, but it does not give you appetite to seek such a profession if you are to be abused like that for a decade before you are accepted as an equal.

I would suspect that the reason it is becoming more woman centric is that the NHS offers maternity benefits and such that allow them to do just as you say. It is a safe, secure job for them. No risks and they get to have a family and career. Why work in the private sector where pay and benefits is largly based on performance and value to the business? (yes, with all the benevolent reasons to be a medical professional, someone still has to pay for the services\materials\facilities\benefits).

Sorry but we are in Europe, and you are not allowed to fire women because they are having children and you are obligated to give them a certain amounts of months of maternity leave. So in the private sector, the nurses have the same rights as those in the NHS when it comes to having children. What it more than often comes down to is choice... they want to be longer with their new born and simply quit the profession for a while. This does have an impact regardless if there is say a few % or more doing at the same time.

In addition, the NHS offers a level of insulation to the repercussions of poor performance, in the way of legal action, that is not available to the private practitioners (unless things have changed in the last few years).

Such repercussions of poor performance happens in the NHS and private sector. Private hospitals and doctors are under the same regulations that the public sector option has.

 

[DiAnna]

Wait... are some of you actually basing opinions of American medical staff/care/etc. on tv shows like ER and Grey's Anatomy??? :lamo

 

[PeteEU]

Wait... are some of you actually basing opinions of American medical staff/care/etc. on tv shows like ER and Grey's Anatomy??? :lamo

No. What I am saying is that TV shows like ER and Grey's Anatomy paint the job of medical doctor as being harsh and abusive, which could be turning away people from the profession in general.. regardless of nationality.