UK's NHS is a catastrophe

[StageLeft]

I know the inevitable arguments are forthcoming between US vs national health care, but they are not strictly necessary here, as Canada absolutely doesn't have problems this severe.

That said, Link

The lives of mothers and babies are being put at risk as births in locations ranging from lifts to toilets - even a caravan - went up 15 per cent last year to almost 4,000.
Health chiefs admit a lack of maternity beds is partly to blame for the crisis, with hundreds of women in labour being turned away from hospitals because they are full.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...ets.html#ixzz0PI9FgMRu

Now, some people will always miss the boat and give labor God knows where, but turning away a woman in labor, really? Fvck that.

BTW, not necessarily indicative of the system, as this is unusally rare, but here Man collapses with ruptured appendix... three weeks after NHS doctors 'took it out'

And grand winner of the Understatement of the year:

'However, we would like to apologise if Mr Wattson felt dissatisfied with the care he received at Great Western Hospital.

Now why would he be dissatisfied?

 

[MovingTarget]

Yet many find such a system preferable to our current one.... It really makes you think about how screwed up our system is.

 

[Slick5150]

If you read the comments below the article, it sounds like most people blame the problem on the costs and overcrowding due to migrants coming to the country just to get free health care. Since what Obama is proposing would only provide coverage to citizens, I don't see how the two relate. We already have a lot of emergency room overcrowding because of illegals and others jamming them up now.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Yet many find such a system preferable to our current one.... It really makes you think about how screwed up our system is.

Define "many" and please tell us what percentage of the population of American citizens would feel Britain's system is preferable to our current system here in the U.S.

 

[rudder]

Britain importing doctors to help with the overflow

Campaigners fear the use of foreign doctors is putting patients' lives at risk.

Michael Summers of the Patients' Association said: 'The problem is that these PCTs send the work to agencies saying we need this number of doctors, we don't really care where you get them, and they get any old Tom, Dick or Harry to do the job for £1,000 a weekend.

'Patients' lives are likely to be put at risk if we do not establish the level of expertise and medical training of these doctors arriving from all over the world.'

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: rudder
Britain importing doctors to help with the overflow

Campaigners fear the use of foreign doctors is putting patients' lives at risk.

Michael Summers of the Patients' Association said: 'The problem is that these PCTs send the work to agencies saying we need this number of doctors, we don't really care where you get them, and they get any old Tom, Dick or Harry to do the job for £1,000 a weekend.

'Patients' lives are likely to be put at risk if we do not establish the level of expertise and medical training of these doctors arriving from all over the world.'

I presume they have to be nationally certified, pass boards, etc. Surely it's not like some witch doctor from Timbuktu can come in and set up a practice.

 

[Acanthus]

Yeah, things like this have never happened at American hospitals

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: rudder
Britain importing doctors to help with the overflow

Campaigners fear the use of foreign doctors is putting patients' lives at risk.

Michael Summers of the Patients' Association said: 'The problem is that these PCTs send the work to agencies saying we need this number of doctors, we don't really care where you get them, and they get any old Tom, Dick or Harry to do the job for £1,000 a weekend.

'Patients' lives are likely to be put at risk if we do not establish the level of expertise and medical training of these doctors arriving from all over the world.'

I presume they have to be nationally certified, pass boards, etc. Surely it's not like some witch doctor from Timbuktu can come in and set up a practice.

According to the article the doctors must have basic General Practitioner training but recent experience is not always necessary. It does not mention board certification and such. Another issue is that these are part time doctors who are just trying to make extra bank after working long hours for another country that probably also has UHC. When they start their shifts they are likely already fatigued.

 

[rudder]

And it is good to know that British government workers are no different than their American counterparts!

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Yet many find such a system preferable to our current one.... It really makes you think about how screwed up our system is.

Define "many" and please tell us what percentage of the population of American citizens would feel Britain's system is preferable to our current system here in the U.S.

Gee, how about those who had insurance but had to go bankrupt to get the treatment they need....or how about those who have no choice but to go to the ER anytime they need a doctor because they can't afford insurance to begin with. Beggars can't be choosers. That part of the population is not statistically insignificant. Our hospitals have similar horror stories...

 

[BarrySotero]

UK'ers will say this is just the Daily Mail being outrageous

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
UK'ers will say this is just the Daily Mail being outrageous

It's not like we'd know or anything, is it?

The Daily Mail is the Dave McOwen of Newspapers.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
UK'ers will say this is just the Daily Mail being outrageous

It's not like we'd know or anything, is it?

The Daily Mail is the Dave McOwen of Newspapers.

Other concerns raised at guardian and times online.

Link Link

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Yet many find such a system preferable to our current one.... It really makes you think about how screwed up our system is.

Define "many" and please tell us what percentage of the population of American citizens would feel Britain's system is preferable to our current system here in the U.S.

Gee, how about those who had insurance but had to go bankrupt to get the treatment they need....or how about those who have no choice but to go to the ER anytime they need a doctor because they can't afford insurance to begin with. Beggars can't be choosers. That part of the population is not statistically insignificant. Our hospitals have similar horror stories...

Gee I was referring to the multiple surveys and polls which show a majority of Americans prefer the system the way it is (albeit reforms are needed for cost controls). If that many Americans were clamoring for a public healthcare system... the dems would have rushed Obamacare through congress. But as we see... elections are coming up and a lot of them want to get re-elected. Now we see all these shining examples of UHC are not so shining.

You seem to forget that it will either be me going bankrupt if I have private insurance and a serious medical condition or the government going bankrupt. For some reason people cannot comprehend the fact that healtcare reform is needed, but government run healthcare is not. Just ask all those vets who now have AIDS and hepatitis due to poorly run VA medical centers.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Yet many find such a system preferable to our current one.... It really makes you think about how screwed up our system is.

Define "many" and please tell us what percentage of the population of American citizens would feel Britain's system is preferable to our current system here in the U.S.

Gee, how about those who had insurance but had to go bankrupt to get the treatment they need....or how about those who have no choice but to go to the ER anytime they need a doctor because they can't afford insurance to begin with. Beggars can't be choosers. That part of the population is not statistically insignificant. Our hospitals have similar horror stories...

Gee I was referring to the multiple surveys and polls which show a majority of Americans prefer the system the way it is (albeit reforms are needed for cost controls). If that many Americans were clamoring for a public healthcare system... the dems would have rushed Obamacare through congress. But as we see... elections are coming up and a lot of them want to get re-elected. Now we see all these shining examples of UHC are not so shining.

You seem to forget that it will either be me going bankrupt if I have private insurance and a serious medical condition or the government going bankrupt. For some reason people cannot comprehend the fact that healtcare reform is needed, but government run healthcare is not. Just ask all those vets who now have AIDS and hepatitis due to poorly run VA medical centers.

I don't put too much value in a lot of these polls. There is simply too much FUD going on about healthcare that you can't really ask a question without it being loaded. Many never use their insurance, many are completely blind to how much it is costing them, and many pay no attention to those who are left out of that system altogether. People on average are quite uninformed/shielded when it comes to the billing/insurance part of healthcare. It is not and should not be a choice of you going bankrupt or the government going bankrupt. If you accept that in trying to do any type of reform, it is doomed to fail.

Healthcare reform is needed, but a government option may be necessary due to the nature of healthcare. 'Consumers' do not have real choices in terms of the cost of plans, providers, etc. just on the insurance side. Actual medical equipment/procedures are even worse in terms of real choices in the 'market'. The free market has failed many in this field. I'm not saying that we should have a complete takeover like Britain, but the government must be a direct player here to provide an actual choice. We've been trying to make it work without a government option for decades now...and it is failing too many people. If an informed group were given the choice between no reform and the British NHS, I believe that it would be close but the NHS would win out.

 

[StageLeft]

I'm not saying that we should have a complete takeover like Britain, but the government must be a direct player here to provide an actual choice.

What do you mean choice? Choice of treatment?

 

[SammyJr]

So you're saying that American doctors and hospitals are perfect and that there is never any malpractice over here?

When I worked at hospital, there were women in the hallways in L&D often enough and women were sent home if there was a lack of beds. This is a serious argument for suggesting homebirths for women with low risk pregnancies. The only reason healthy American births are done in hospitals is so that they can charge you for "hospital services" and up sell you on the unnecessary extras like circumcision. My son was born in the hospital. All the hospital did for us was send us a bill. Our daughter was born at home and the midwife was 10% the cost.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

I'm not saying that we should have a complete takeover like Britain, but the government must be a direct player here to provide an actual choice.

What do you mean choice? Choice of treatment?

I think he's talking about choice of insurance provider, the same way that pretty much every other industrialized country does it. I always find it strange that people try to compare the UK's system to ours, as not only do they spend literally about half what we do per capita each year, but the fundamental structure is nothing like what anyone has ever proposed be implemented here.

I've heard 'single payer' be put forth many times. (and sooner or later I imagine we will go to it after our country is mugged by reality long enough) I have never seen a credible politician put forth a bill for a complete nationalization of health services.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: rudder
Britain importing doctors to help with the overflow

Campaigners fear the use of foreign doctors is putting patients' lives at risk.

Michael Summers of the Patients' Association said: 'The problem is that these PCTs send the work to agencies saying we need this number of doctors, we don't really care where you get them, and they get any old Tom, Dick or Harry to do the job for £1,000 a weekend.

'Patients' lives are likely to be put at risk if we do not establish the level of expertise and medical training of these doctors arriving from all over the world.'

There are many, many foreign doctors in the U.S., too.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Slick5150
If you read the comments below the article, it sounds like most people blame the problem on the costs and overcrowding due to migrants coming to the country just to get free health care. Since what Obama is proposing would only provide coverage to citizens, I don't see how the two relate. We already have a lot of emergency room overcrowding because of illegals and others jamming them up now.

most state laws prohibit hospitals from denying care to illegals, so you're argument doesn't wash.

 

[StageLeft]

[qSo you're saying that American doctors and hospitals are perfect and that there is never any malpractice over here? [/quote]That is exactly what I'm saying.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

So you're saying that American doctors and hospitals are perfect and that there is never any malpractice over here?

That is exactly what I'm saying.

LOL

 

[BarrySotero]

Keep in mind as the NHS cuts back on care the bureaucracy has grown

"National Health Care Builds Bureaucracy
Bureaucracy row as NHS spending soars

NHS spending on backroom staff and management consultants has increased by more than 80 per cent in just four years, new figures have revealed.



Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) shelled out £1.2bn on administrative and clerical staff in 2008, up from the £530m they spent in 2004. It has led to accusations that the Government has broken a pledge to tackle the costs of bureaucracy within the health service.

Spending on management consultants by PCTs has tripled to £139m since 2004, according to figures released in response to a Parliamentary Question. PCTs were also found to be spending £115m a year on hiring agency administrative and clerical staff, more than twice the amount spent in 2004. However, the outlay on administrative staff working within hospitals had fallen by nine per cent since 2004."

http://urethaneblog.typepad.co...uilds-bureaucracy.html

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

I'm not saying that we should have a complete takeover like Britain, but the government must be a direct player here to provide an actual choice.

What do you mean choice? Choice of treatment?

Both, but for different reasons. When you need a surgery/procedure done, especially if it is critical, shopping around for the best price simply is not an option. It isn't like shopping around for other goods and services as it is done on one's person (often under threat of life/limb). As for providers, as our system is largely employer-based, the only practical choice is take it or leave it. Going outside of your employer will cost significantly more to the point that it is not an option at all.

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I know the inevitable arguments are forthcoming between US vs national health care, but they are not strictly necessary here, as Canada absolutely doesn't have problems this severe.

That said, Link

The lives of mothers and babies are being put at risk as births in locations ranging from lifts to toilets - even a caravan - went up 15 per cent last year to almost 4,000.
Health chiefs admit a lack of maternity beds is partly to blame for the crisis, with hundreds of women in labour being turned away from hospitals because they are full.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...ets.html#ixzz0PI9FgMRu

Now, some people will always miss the boat and give labor God knows where, but turning away a woman in labor, really? Fvck that.

BTW, not necessarily indicative of the system, as this is unusally rare, but here Man collapses with ruptured appendix... three weeks after NHS doctors 'took it out'

And grand winner of the Understatement of the year:

'However, we would like to apologise if Mr Wattson felt dissatisfied with the care he received at Great Western Hospital.

Now why would he be dissatisfied?

I live in UK and one of many people glad we have the NHS,its not perfect but far from lot of FUD that appears to be seen in USA ,I have had good treatment over the years and think NHS can be improved ie ..usual problems like staff are underpaid ,overworked ,waiting times etc....anyway would it work in US?.. well thats down to how its implemented I think.

For the record I don't know anybody thats died due to incompetance in NHS or been turned away from medical treatment.