To rant because this NHS is not a charity

[Monty27]

Wtf is all this about having to donate to a service that is national.
The clue is in the name:
NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE
and breathe 😭

Obviously NI is a tax but it’s easier to sell it as being for the NHS.

I thought ni just paid for pensions now.

We definitely need to look at funding and what services we should be providing. I wouldn't be against some means testing for certain procedures. (ivf, parts of maternity care, gender reassignment)

But sorting out the tax problem in this country would be a bloody good start. If we had better funded home care and social care a lot of burden would be easiest from the NHS. This happens through taxes.

What the NHS was set up for and now what it provides are so vastly different

It was just incomprehensible in 1948 the treatments that are now routinely done or the millions upon millions of pounds worth of equipment needed (and then their is the training, the upkeep of such equipment)

The money goes towards often making those at their end of life or long hospital stays more comfortable

The money raised is a drop in the ocean but it does go towards making both patients and staff situations easier at times to manage

The NHS simply can’t not cover ever single cost the public expect it to. To do so we would all have to pay a considerable amount more not 1p in the £

Bear in mind that when people on any sort of benefit, including disability, go into hospital, all their benefits are stopped. But they still have to pay their domestic bills. Making them pay for food, when people are already undernourished in hospital, would be cruel.

I’m pretty sure it’s been well pointed out already, but the NHS charities provide things that aren’t medically necessary but improve things for patients and staff.

When my dad was dying of cancer the room he spent much of his final weeks in had a proper TV in rather than the Hospicom ones that had to be paid for. That TV was provided by the hospital charity, and greatly improved his final days outside of visiting times.

When I was in hospital giving birth, some women (not me because there weren’t enough) were able to be monitored wirelessly so they were able to move around, there were plenty of non wireless machines that do a perfectly adequate job but the wireless ones funded by the hospital charity greatly improved patient experience.

They also do things like provide toys etc to the children’s hospital. Do you thing toys, TVs, expensive non essential equipment should be bought from NHS budgets?!

Because the charities that the money goes too will provide so many things for the NHS that people need.

The NHS is not a bottomless pit, do you not understand that? If it was I wouldn’t be waiting 18 bloody months for an operation!!!!

Wow this thread has taken some crazy turns. I feel a little sorry for OP who set off with a very ill informed and naive , and frankly rather angry post. I am not really quite sure why. It is pertinent to note that learning about the Inception of the NHS in 1948 at the age of 15, cannot give a person an inkling about how it has evolved and the political football it has become. It is not the best health service in Europe, it is underfunded, by ALL of us. It is abused by many. It is not Holy and untouchable. It is however a damn sight better that the US and many underdeveloped countries. It is under seige at the moment so it would be better if we all did our best and let our anger be managed. Ther are those who feel angry for all sorts of reasons, and look for a scapegoat

I remember the local maternity unit posting about recieving a donation which the donator asked to be spent on soft closing bin lids so in the ward you didn't keep getting woken up by the sound of bins closing. Something that it wouldn't be justifiable probably to spend general funds on as not essential, but definitely makes a difference!

It is not the best health service in Europe, it is underfunded, by ALL of us. It is abused by many. It is not Holy and untouchable

The gov and the media do a very good job of making us belive the nhs is fantastic, can't be beaten, best in the world. When that is far, far from the case.

Yes its a good services and we're lucky it's free for all. But it's not even on par with many other countries, many of whom are also free to use. Some of our hospitals are quite frankly shocking.

I was rather disappointed Boris was treated in St Thomas's and not Whipscross. Then he would got an idea of what the other end of the nhs is like.

I also think this idea that the nhs is the best, encourages time wasters and pushes out the idea that it doesn't need more funding, it needs less and better management.

The nhs has problems, lots of them. We should be more open and honest about them. But unless you have really needed their services, other than critical care which to be honest they can't be faulted on, or work in the nhs, you probably will never know about them.

I see that we've got into the "we can have the NHS as publicly funded free at point of use" vs "we'll be like America" discussion.

There are better ways as pp have said:
The health care system in France and Germany is a mixture of state and private funding. Everybody has insurance according to their income.

I think the biggest problem the NHS may have (I haven't researched but I'm sure other posters are better informed) is that the funding isn't ring-fenced for the NHS and all taxation goes into a pot and the government of the day prioritises. Therefore yes, under Labour who are traditionally seen as underfunding the military we ended up buying our own boots and body armour. And under the Tories who really would rather have an at-least-partly privatised NHS the spending is different.

In Germany the money that is paid for the health insurance goes directly to the insurer you picked. You can select whichever one you think suits you. Mine pais all my medical costs and included, free of charge, my two DCs until they reached the stage where they got their own (student, apprentice).

Where i think the NHS should improve is in 2 areas. 1 is the way it is used and the services it offers. Hard as it will be for some things they will have to be rationed - and that will probably include things like viagra, IVF and other non-life-threatening procedures. (I'm not talking about stopping, I'm talking about rationing). And not in a means-tested way because everyone contributes to the NHS

and 2nd I think they have to look at their management / procurement structure. People always go on about how the NHS has too many non-medical managers, but they need people who know how to work properly in procurement, preferably with extra training for the NHS. And their sourcing needs to be widened (including qualifying suppliers, other industries manage it, there is no reason the NHS couldn't)

Some fault lies with the users. you only have to see some of the discussions after a "AIBU to have gone to A&E with my ingrowing toenail" type threads to see what those faults are.

Interesting comment about how the charitable donations are used, though, loved the description of the alzheimer's patients and their bus stops.

I think OP was annoyed that there have been people online saying about how the NHS is a charity, rather than understanding that the fundraising is for NHS Charities - who, as an umbrella charity, do lots of great work on health and well-being causes around the UK.
I have seen someone on Twitter arguing that the NHS must be a charity as they provide a service beneficial to all, which can be a frustrating attitude. That being said, maybe I find this sort of attitude frustrating as I work for a charity on whose support a lot of people rely on, and we are experiencing financial difficulties with our retail and fundraising arms unable to do anything.
This however is not me taking away from the excellent work that NHS Charities do and I’m glad they are being recognised for their work.

Really not seeing the problem... You are not having to donate, why begrudge others choosing to?

Why are people still advocating an insurance-based model? Insurance companies aren't charities, either. They exist to make their shareholders money.

Health insurance companies in other European countries are very, very strictly regulated, and actually in a lot of places, the government, not private companies, provides health insurance.

The NHS will not survive much longer if everything is free (for those that can afford to pay).

The point of it being a National heath service is that everybody in the nation should be able to get healthcare that is free at the point of entry. It has grown to a point that it cannot be just funded through taxes (or at least not while it is not being prioritised from tax expenditure) so some funding comes from research, some through private enterprise, and some through charity funding. National does not mean state funded. It did when it began, but it doesn't now.

What I don't really understand is why paying for it all through insurance suddenly makes it affordable?

Yes, lots of european countries have good healthcare provided through combinations of state and insurance. They also pay more for it (as a % of GDP) than we do. Surely it doesn't matter that much whether we pay more in taxes or pay insurance fees instead. The point is that we need to pay more, to get more.

Who said NHS management embezzled funds? I don’t recall that.

Somebody posted;

But what I dont want to happen is all this funding to go into so managers back pocket.

This would be fraud. The NHS has a complex pay and grading structure anyone pocketing more than their salary would be committing fraud.

What I don't really understand is why paying for it all through insurance suddenly makes it affordable?

Because the money is ring fenced. The insurance companies do nothing else but handle health insurance (some have private, some not)

The big question is: what do people in the UK want the NHS to be.

Sorry to interrupt the thread, but we just wanted to hop on to explain that we've deleted a number of posts by a previously banned poster who appears to have come back just to stir things up about MN Premium.

As Justine said on the Site Stuff thread, it absolutely won't make any difference to our moderation decisions if someone is a Premium member - and in any case, it won't be visible to posters or moderators in their day to day use of the site. We're working on bringing lots of great features to our Premium members - but special moderation privileges won't be one of them!

Hope that clears up any misconceptions, and sorry again for the interruption.

Obviously NI is a tax but it’s easier to sell it as being for the NHS

When I last looked only a minute portion of NI goes to the NHS, the majority of it is paid for by general taxation. NI mainly pays for contributory benefits - mostly unemployment benefit and pensions. How much do you think you would have to raise NI to also pay for the NHS?

Fair play for taking the time to delete those posts, clarify the issue and not just burning the thread @JoMumsnet

Thanks!

I don't see the point in an insurance based system. Just raise taxes and have a ring fensed pot for the nhs. I think we need to remove all the politics as well. Give it some sort of protection.

Thank you jomumsnet

Because the money is ring fenced. The insurance companies do nothing else but handle health insurance (some have private, some not)

So how would that help?
Still doesn't stop any Govt from doing what it likes with the taxation part of the equation and choosing to spend it or not, on healthcare.

I guess what is needed is a consensus on what we as a country want- USA style system where the wealthy are ok but millions don't have any healthcare and rely on charity OR a european system where healthcare is, generally, free at the point of use and ALL political parties agree to fund it, without the reliance on donations... i don't really want to see crowdfunding as the first port of call to treat someones cancer etc BUT i think that is the direction the british people will chose.

Same with schools though, they are not charities and many are funded by the LEA or central government but still have a PTA to help buy a forest lodge/iPads/maths equipment or whatever. It's okay!

It is not a charity. It is however underfunded and charitable donations help just the same as when you donate to the PTA for your school and so on. In this time of crisis when there is even more pressure on the NHS then any charitable donations made now may ease the inevitable tax burden that will arise when taxes are raised to fund the current furloughing and business grants being made.

Same with schools though, they are not charities and many are funded by the LEA or central government but still have a PTA to help buy a forest lodge/iPads/maths equipment or whatever. It's okay!

It's not Okay!
If you live in leafy Surrey, your PTA has no problem raising funds for extra Ipads..... live in a run down, poor area and the charitable giving is not there.
Every child should get the opportunity achieve, the aim should be it shouldn't matter where you live.