Lots of drama about more political scandals in the papers today, but one article caught my eye and it's nothing to do with labour's disgraceful and corrupt behaviour.
Professor John Smyth's article in the Sunday Times is headed 'Heathcare isn't free'. Quite a statement when people of my age have always believed we would be looked after from the cradle to the grave, but he's right. We have some of the best medical research experts in the world here and we plough millions of pounds into their work without complaint, because we know their work will be of benefit to us. The problem is, as Professor Smyth puts it, "For the first time in history we have medicines and technologies that far exceed affordability. It means that healthcare isn't free - it is that simple. We are going to have to make some tough choices. My question is : who is going to make these decisions?"
Medical technology doesn't come cheap, in fact it's usually very expensive, but we still expect to enjoy the benefits. I know, listening to medical friends, that not everyone receives the same treatment for the same problem and the main reason seems cost. So some healthcare is rationed already but, because only a few of us have the relevant medical knowledge, we're not aware of this. His question has to be answered and someone has to take the bull by the horns and bring the debate into the public domain. We can't go on paying far less in NHI than it actually costs. How often have you heard someone say, when one of their nearest and dearest requires life-saving treatment, that they would willingly sell their home to ensure they get the best? I know I would and without question.
One small way money could be better used within the NHS is making full use of modern equipment. In my local hospital the scanning department only operates 9 to 5 Monday to Friday and there is no service over bank holidays, unless it is a matter of life or death. I'm sure people wouldn't mind attending hospital in an evening or a weekend if they were able to get their scans more quickly. Of course there would be additional staffing costs but they could be balanced by the costs of keeping patients on medication which may not be necessary.
As Professor Smyth says, "We have a real dilemma in what to do with the resources we have. Nobody can afford it all. We have to face up to rationing."
Who is going to be brave enough to answer his question - 'Who is going to make these decisions?'
Posts
14 comments:
You are going to differentiate between what is needing treatment and what is a minor illness.
In the olden days when you had a minor illness you just got on with it. Nowadays every minor ailment is cause for treatment Using limited public money.
not rationing but prioritising
Obviously the Torys will turn Health care over to the free market and let each individual pay for their own treatment. with their own money and not with other peoples.
Lower tax less state interference..the Tory way
Morning Niko, I wonder if the tories will introduce a health insurance similar to some of the Europeans. Many would say that's a two-tier system but I'm not to sure. Long time since I used it.
I'm sure this will provoke outrage, but I'd like to say that based on current experience, I really hope the Tories do not privatise the NHS. I say this because history shows us that we have never had any privatisation that has improved the lot of the customer, and the reason for this is that in the UK every privatisation has taken a large state monopoly and replaced it with a number of smaller, still-state-subsidised monopolies.
I can already see what a privatised NHS would look like: each NHS trust would become its own little geographical monopoly, with no competition for anybody living in that area. And the taxpayer would STILL be chucking huge amounts of cash at them, like we do at the rail companies.
George latest missive is all about cutting Government spending..
Neither a borrower nor a lender be;
For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
William Shakespeare, "Hamlet", Act 1 scene 3
seems to be Mr Osborne's creed ...for now
I'm sure it will to Obo, but it has to be addressed sooner rather than later. Like you, I've no wish to see privatisation for the very reasons you state.
What other alternative is there though? Would people be prepared to pay more tax specifically for the NHS?
There is a two tier culture at present although it's very subtle. We hear about it now and again, articles which mention top medics are thinking of not treating smokers, the obese, the elderly. Cheap medication is given when more expensive medication would be far more effective. The list goes on.
Ah Niko you've been watching Andrew Marr. Didn't you feel lonely being the only viewer?
I'll comment once I've had a look on iPlayer later. Thanks for the Shakespeare.
Spot on Obnoxio.
Monopolies are wrong, state and especially private.
The problem with the privatisation of state monopolies is that they were all effectively handed over to a private one.
Monopolies work for their own benefit period. In the public sector it is for the clowns who work there. In the private sector it is for the maximisation of the shareholders dividend and, increasingly so, the bonuses of the heid bumbers.
WV = optic Brilliant
Three Cheers for Nicola Sturgeon, Hip Hip ...
I thought, for a second it said
New Hip Today!
Then I put my glasses on.
Faux Cu
Early onset dementia sure sign of..
I'll tell you Obo if you knew the fiddles going on at network rail....
People have been buying new cars cash
in carrier bags full no less...I kid you not
Mr Myxkjshyejes
Not dementia, just the result of a life of wine, women and song, if only I could remember it.
When I first read that FC I thought it said '... if only I could remember which.'
The NHS has only ever been free at the point of need.
If we wish to spend more on it we must either a) increase taxes or b) cut spending elsewhere. As with everything else it is a balancing act. I think many would argue that the balance has shifted slightly too far in favour of spending on the aged at the expense of the young. The cause being that there are now more pensioners than young people.
There are twice as many pensioners now as there were in the 1950s - and half as many teenagers. That simple demographic fact explains why pensioners get free bus travel for example but teenagers don't. Straying slightly off the subject there but I hope people see my point.
There is incidentally no way in my opinion that the NHS will ever be privatised in Scotland. There is simply no support for it among voters. And voters call the shots.
Hi Indy. I wonder if people would be willing to contribute more to their health care. Being a pensioner (who doesn't have a bus pass) I would be willing to contribute a little more if it ensure everyone and I mean babies to geriatrics, received the best treatment. It's not care I'm referring to but treatment, rather a difference.
I do hope your last paragraph is true. It seems England could go down the privatisation route even more, it's already started with these walk-in centres.
Post a Comment