To think the NHS is bloody wonderful and that we're very, very lucky?

[ScaredyDog]

I know everyone will have had a bad experience (I know I have) but generally, I think we're so lucky.

I've been to one hospital today as an emergency and been referred elsewhere. I don't have to pay to see a doctor, the staff have been absolutely lovely (which I hope they will also be at the other hospital) and I was seen immediately. We even had a laugh about my ridiculously sized elephant foot :)

I know prescriptions can seem expensive, but really, that's the only bit we pay for upfront so to speak (and most people don't pay for their prescriptions, I'm told).

Hoping for another good experience at the next hospital anyway :) Yay for HCPs and the NHS.

thanks ll
I'd love to I'm just not sure you fancy the 6 tiny feet that would come too

however for a fortnight........ chocolate .............yodelling..............picking daisies like Heidi in an Alpine meadow................

when will you accept that there are insurance based systems which WORK, and which do not let people slip under the net? THEY EXIST, WE LIVE IN SUCH A SYSTEM. You don't like to think of it because it suggests that the NHS is inadequate.

What happens after 2 years? God forbid, what if the stress of his unemployment causes an MI at 2 years 6 month??
I think you are treading on very dangerous ground suggesting that the British work ethic is somehow linked to the NHS and that British people are 'overrun by lazy take the piss types' who are 'sponging off the state'

I think your remarks are bordering on being racist!!!
You should read the 'leadership is the enemy of the state switzerland cuckoo clock theory' you may not be so quick to attack other cultures

And just because your system is looking after YOU just now, does not mean it will look after everyone no matter what, and certainly does not suggest that the NHS is inadequate.

bemybebe - your DH's case sounds quite scary indeed. I cannot comment at all as to why they would have felt that he could wait that long for the scan and am glad that he has been operated on successfully. Thank you for explaining more fully.

empusa in the dutch system EVERYone can get kraamzorg care after the baby is born. www.passionateparenting.nl/pregnancy-and-birth/kraamzorg.php

There is a contribution of 3.50 euro per hour, but in return you get 8 hours per day for 10 days help with the baby, older children, cleaning and cooking. Lactation adviser who comes to your house is a separate professional person and free until lactation is established afaik.

Well possibly because it annoys me that the NHS gets so much abuse, it is such an easy target. I don't deny other European countries have excellent healthcare systems but they also have a lot less social problems and the resultant health problems to deal with than we in the UK do. Even the numbers we have to deal with are on a much larger scale.

I also get slightly annoyed at the generalisation about scroungers and lack of work ethic - me and everyone I know all have a very stong work ethic believe me.

Thumb the NHS though he could wait because they did not know that he had his aneurysm then. The NHS scan was two weeks away, but GP said the matter was super urgent, so we went private where the diagnosis was confirmed. Another lottery case, this time we were not forced to play it, just went private.

www.passionateparenting.nl/pregnancy-and-birth/kraamzorg.php

I have no interest in legally pursuing the NHS. Do you know what negligence means? Lack of care and attention. If the NHS had a duty to test me than yes, negligent, but it did not, because testing for my infection is accepted as too expensive (as in expense vs the number of cases diagnosed). I was told my baby and I were "just too unlucky".

I am very familiar with the concept of negligence, a legal definition that proves all of the four following facts

(1) a duty of care was owed by the physician;
(2) the physician violated the applicable standard of care;
(3) the person suffered a compensable injury; and
(4) the injury was caused in fact and proximately caused by the substandard conduct. The burden of proving these elements is on the plaintiff in a malpractice lawsuit.

The applicable standard of care does not need to be defined by the NHS standard, if you have any evidence to say that any system has evidence to show that this SHOULD be the standard of care then you have a case (expense or no expense)
I hope you do consider it.

Then you had a very good GP, bemybebe - who may well have saved your DH's life :) was he an NHS GP?

Medicene is a science and science does not always get it right. It is also a science practised by human beings and they are not perfect either. Therefore, all health care services will have patients where it didn't work out.

I personally see a great deal of data concerning the successes and failure of UK healthcare, both private and NHS. Very often, if you go private you will see a doctor who was trained in and probably still works in the NHS. There is no great difference in the standard of treatment.

The isssue is the delivery of this treatment and the payment structure behind it.

Ours is one of the most financially efficent in the world. Leave it alone.

Sorry, thumb I misspell because I am keen to post quickly.

bemybebe That's really interesting, however it wasn't me who was asking about care after pregnancy

londonlottie "There is so much 'shame' in not working"

That exists here as well, trust me.

- sorry, bemybebe - what did you mis-spell? I didn't notice anything?
I was being a little tongue-in-cheek there, asking if your GP was an NHS one - in that I was pointing out that a part of the NHS did actually contribute to saving your DH's life if your GP was NHS, even if other parts of it may have put his life at risk.
But I am not trying to needle you, so will stop now - as I said, i am very pleased for you that your DH came through that operation and I hope he has no further problems in that area!

Thumb he was an NHS GP. The one whos appointment we waited for another X-number of days prior to all this. I am also eternally grateful to him but not the NHS.

I do not say that all the doctors, surgeons, etc are bad, I am saying that the system is not as fantastic as you seem to think and there is nothing wrong with looking what other comparable systems have that the NHS does not.

As for myself and my dh, we have super health insurance (not UK provider) and I am happy to remove myself from the NHS system, leaving extra funding to all of you guys. Unless it is an emergency that does not have private equivalent in the UK.

I feel safer this way.

x-posted with you thumb!

Thumbwitch - my dad had a ruptured AAA - he was admiitted to A&E and within less than an hour was in theatre. The hospital staff made it more than clear there was less than a 20% survival rate even after a successful operation. As you said, not at any point did anyone say 'let's not bother'. Two years later he is still here with us.

To the poster that said the NHS costs £2000 per person ( I assume he meant per year), then my dad probably used up his lifetimes cost just for that one operation. Just because you never need treatment doesn't mean someone else won't and the NHS is there for us all. We are very very lucky in this country. The NHS may not be perfect and mistakes do get made but the mistakes get the publicity, the successes don't.

Bemybabe, you cannot remove yourself from the system. You go private, chances are that you'll just see an NHS doctor anyway, just maybe a bit quicker (and that isn't guaranteed). You'll probably get a private room and nicer food but that's about it.

I don't know that the NHS needs to be reformed. Seems fine to me.

I don't think an insurance based system is an ideal solution tbh. I think it would miss people, and unfortunately, the people with the least money, are also usually the ones with the poorest health. So the most in need.

PIMS my case does not fall under any of your mentioned four I am afraid. Moreover, we had two long meeting with the NHS hospital and consultants and I am satisfied that the care that was given was within the appropriate guidelines. Too bad that though statistically I had less that 1% chance of what happened happening, my baby is 100% dead now.

I am tired and stressed by this all (she died on July 1st) and I want to turn the page. She will always be in my heart and there is nothing anybody can do to bring her back.

I am 39, my dh had sperm mortility issues and if I do get strength to do something it is to see if we still can have a family together. IVF is a long and emotional road, not available to me on the NHS.

Georgelassosthemoon - so pleased to hear that! It was a real heart-sink for any of us in the lab when we got one of those, because of the low success rate - we might not be on the front line but we did get very involved in the drama and emotion! Have been in tears at the end of a night of blood supplying before now, when it hasn't worked out. Glad yoru Dad was a success. :)

The point about the larger population is also that it is a more mobile population, there is more social deprivation, and hence there is a greater range of illness to treat. For example because of the population profile of one of the boroughs I have worked in rates of eclampsia and pre-eclampsia were incredibly high, therefore maternity care was more complex and inevitably cost more. In other more homogenous places in britain and elsewhere pre-eclampsia is rarer therefore maternity care was possibly less problematic and cheaper.

TB in London is a huge problem because of our population profile (whatever your views on that - not getting into that debate too!) I would hazard a guess that it's less of a problem in Switzerland.