We DO pay to see our GP's via taxation an average of £30 per visit.
We SHOULD be questioning why it's not being funded and run properly but that's nothing to do with how it's paid for.
"Ah, the niavety of someone lucky enough to only need to see a doctor when they 'fall ill'." Just what I was thinking! The people who'd be spending more as they have more appointments they need are those who can least afford it!
£10 might not be much to you op, to me it's my weekly electric top up, 1/4 ish of my weekly food bill. It's a lot of money when you're on a tight budget because you can't work due to ill health and needing appointments most weeks.
If this model were in when dd was still a child just a few years ago, she also has a disability so easily possible I'd have needed to miss a weeks food to cover medical appointments costs - or not have the appointments and dd and I go untreated, only to have things worse possibly leading to hospital admission.
"If our governments raised tax the NHS could be better and still free" even this isn't necessary!
This govt have CHOSEN to use our taxes to (not a full/exhaustive list) bribe the dup to stay in power, pay themselves exorbitant pay rises and expenses, cut taxes to the very rich, wasted on a punitive and ineffectual new benefits system that isn't working, pratting about with brexit...
That's the real wastage of our taxes!
"Obviously for it to work, there would be protections in place for people on low incomes and people with long term conditions."
"Obviously children and the poorest would be exempt from charges"
You'd trust THIS govt to do this effectively and fairly? I bloody wouldn't trust them to organise a piss up in a brewery
Plus there's the cost of administration especially if there's exemptions - which the govt are very reluctant to disclose fully.
Yes we need more and arguably better quality gp's in some cases.
@colehawlins I rarely tag people but I'm very interested to know more of what you know on this and what time period.
"Yes more GPs but also an end to fund-holding.
GPs are noticeably less keen to refer since they have been running their own budgets. The inevitable result has been undiagnosed patients are clogging up primary care taking up multiple appointments with the same set of symptoms until either they hit crisis point and end up in A&E or a referral is finally made. People are arriving in outpatients clinic sicker and with more complications, apparently."
I started a thread in October about medics being particularly dismissive of women. There are some truly shocking stories on it, including people as you say ending up in a&e, admitted as inpatients and even dying as a result of gp's fobbing them off with quite serious symptoms - mainly because they're avoiding referring them or their children to specialists. I have personal experience of this with my own endometriosis (14 yrs until DX, 3 babies lost, 3 surgeries needed in the end) and dds disability (several years of symptoms inc a hospital stay of 10 days that we later learned could have been avoided if dd had been DX and the issue would have been treated differently/more aggressively from start).
The issue of Gp's not making referrals when they should seriously needs addressing.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3402449-Aibu-to-ask-you-to-tell-me-your-experiences-of-being-dismissed-by-medics-as-a-sick-woman-I-promise-to-listen?watched=1&msgid=85248454#85248454
IF it were decided to charge for GP visits then I expect the quality of those appointments to be better than they currently are in certain ways!
"it’s worth noting that Norway has the joint best health outcomes of any country in Europe. And it ranks third in Europe in the overall consumer health index which looks at things like drugs and waiting times" there's far more factors that affect a persons and a nations health outcomes than just the healthcare system. Employment, wage rates, housing, childcare, social care etc all have a huge effect on this too.
"But in Norway their taxes are much higher than ours AND they still charge a nominal fee for health services" if it's so well run why do they NEED both higher taxes and fees paid to Drs?
"Perhaps they think this way that patients are encouraged to take a bit more responsibility for showing up to appointments and following medical advice, and doctors surgeries are encouraged to treat patients a bit better..." I really think 4 visits as a visitor who could afford to pay is nowhere near even being classed as evidence for their system being better!
SurgeHopper - almost all illness/injury/disability is "self inflicted" or otherwise avoidable. The only exceptions being genetic conditions the parents weren't aware of before conceiving! People aren't perfect it's the nature of being human. Yes there are excesses that need addressing but it's still not as simple as being that sufferers fault. You cited certain examples:
Alcohol - it's relatively recently that the damaging effects of alcohol have really started to be well understood, particularly in non alcoholics. Indeed even among medics it's not totally agreed what amounts are problematic and which conditions are caused/exacerbated by it. Previously alcohol was even PRESCRIBED for certain conditions and not even that long ago. Imo the availability and the advertising of it is very poorly regulated. The cultural aspects of our relationship with alcohol as a nation seriously needs addressing - there's subsidised bars in the Houses of Parliament, mps are voting on important issues while under the influence ffs!
Tobacco - very similar to alcohol. We're slightly further down the road in recognising the harm it does but we're still a long way from it not being a big problem. Availability & advertising is slightly better regulated than alcohol but not massively so. Again there's huge cultural issues around its use. Then even with the move to vaping - we don't yet have long term evidence/research that this is actually safer, what little research there is that supposedly proves its safe is usually funded by the manufacturers (not always obviously so but if you dig that's what you find out)
Poor diet - I personally think we're only just starting to acknowledge the harm of certain ingredients, and some I don't think have even been started to be researched properly, including those that supposedly make food "healthier" (sweeteners come to mind). Generally speaking there's no bad food within a good diet, the problem is people eating too much of the same types of foods and not enough of others. Plus of course preferred cooking methods - which aren't always just out of laziness, it's quicker and cheaper fuel wise to fry something than boil or oven cook. This is one of the reasons why poverty is a factor in poor diet. Also the initial costs of some foods are cheaper than others and cheaper more filling foods aren't necessarily the healthiest foods to be eating the most of. Numerous discussions on mn on this.
My disability is as a result of a car accident, I was stationery some fool hit me. So not sure how me the patient having a non entitled attitude would have changed that.
The endo they're not entirely sure why that happens but believe there's a genetic component but possibly environmental factors too - do you think patients are to blame for pollution? Including that from nuclear testing and illegal disposal of chemicals etc?
Dd has a genetic disability that her father and I had no idea we were carriers of until she was DX. Neither of us are sufferers but now I know more about it (and still learning) I'm fairly confident there's relatives on both sides that are undx sufferers, albeit milder cases. Although in one case not mild symptoms but with a misdx in place (exs side, I have mentioned it to him but he was pretty dismissive so I doubt he's mentioned it and I'm no longer in contact with them due to the divorce).
But then perhaps you'll say dd shouldn't become a mother? Well then you're getting into eugenics.
"Another way to kill off those pesky poor people (besides a no deal Brexit obvs)" yep!
Personally I think we should be going back to post war national insurance ringfencing minus using "surplus" for other govt determined expenditure - because it's clear its NOT really a surplus and should be reinvested in the Nhs and welfare state.
The money is there for properly funding and running the Nhs it's being diverted for other govt agendas.