Private surgery complications should not be covered by NHS?

[mantyzer]

People can pay for private medical care if they want to. But the NHS should not have to pick up the cost of botched surgery or complications. If you go private you should either be rich enough that you can pay yourself for any complications, or have insurance that will cover complications.
Currently the NHS are picking up complications caused by private medical treatment, complications which can be expensive and complex.

If people are partaking in cosmetic elective surgery abroad they should have to declare at point of leaving country and produce acceptable insurance docs. The Turkey teeth repairs and body surgery issues are not tax payers responsibility!!!!! If an elderly patient can't get care or a young person can't get treatment then the NHS has no business spending our money on personal choices taken by adults. I await the rush of lip injection problems coming, every time I hit the school gates I'm seeing lips that are making the lip wearers face look like it's been pulled through a sink plunger.

YABVVVU.

Also what you're proposing would see us ending up more like the US. People who don't have any medical insurance because they can't afford it, can't afford to get treatment whilst something is still relatively unserious and fixable. So they leave it as they have no choice (no doubt enduring pain and diminished quality of life) until it becomes really critical, and then they can be treated in an emergency department when it's incredibly serious, and also takes enormous resources to care for. Ok I get you're talking about people having something private in the meantime and then needing NHS care because something has gone wrong, but it would end up in the same place if money becomes a factor in the intervening period, it will cost the NHS more in the long term once it becomes really really serious, if that makes sense.

So where does that argument stop?

If you go on a thrill seeking holiday abroad, doing something like mountain climbing, abseiling and you have an accident in the course thereof, the NHS shouldn't be available to you when you return home with injuries?

People who tend to get cosmetic surgery abroad often have some form of body dysmorphic disorder or are depressed about a part of their body that is affecting their day-to-day or professional life.

Take my teeth. I have an overbite and gap teeth. The NHS refused me treatment. It's now affecting my breathing at night because my jaw is misaligned and I don't get a deep breath. I'm exhausted every day and have poor exercise tolerance. I am extremely self-conscious in social settings.

So I live with it. But you're saying if I go abroad seeking relief I shouldn't get follow up care if it goes wrong when the NHS has refused to help? What about women who want breast reduction surgery because their backs are done in, who don't qualify for help.

If someone is obsessed with their lips and gets them done abroad and it goes wrong, that would cause mental suffering but they should just live with it until it becomes so bad they can't function?

I don't think people realise all the things the NHS isn't doing well or treating by the way. If you are chronically ill you see a different side to things. At that point you are often virtually pushed into private care. Ie. Paying private despite being poor and having other needs for that money.

Doctors are (rightly) not allowed to refuse to treat any sick or injured person no matter what the cause of the sickness or injury.

The NHS also makes money from private healthcare. I had a knee replacement done at a private hospital owned by the nhs. Its profits go back into the nhs.... if my knee surgery fails who should look after me? The NHS or the NHS Private hospital ?
Give your head a wobble

It would be managed, introduced over time, the private hospitals and or PHI companies providing the cover in with their fees, nothing to do with pre existing, it would also have the added advantage of the private sector upping their game and of course the claims data made available so punters can see which hospitals use the NHS the most for "complications"

I'd also want the fees to be made more transparent, a while back i had a small hernia op done via PHI, the surgeon got £400, the hospital £1200, BUT if i'd been self funding, the hospital would have charged me £3200 but perfectly happy to get just £1600 from AXA.

I only knew any of this because the hospital secretary inadvertently sent me an email i was never supposed to see.

If an insurance company will not provide insurance for complications for private surgery, then it suggests the surgery should not be happening as it is far too risky.

You are going round in circles and not making sense. If an NHS operation has complications, for which you have paid through taxes, you go back to them. Or you could choose to get it rectified privately if you no longer want to trust the NHS.

I repeat, it doesn't matter who is paying to provide the service. We all pay one way or the other, those who go private are paying twice, and we all have a right to use the NHS at any stage, and for any treatment, remedial or not.

I think private health insurance should be forced to cover the full cost, including readmission with complications. Insurance companies should not be able to dump patients on the NHS and walk away when they get too expensive.

I don’t think self-funding patients should get a second bill, or be turned away by the NHS.

Currently the NHS are picking up complications caused by private medical treatment, complications which can be expensive and complex

OP, can you please provide the annual cost of these cases?

so simplistic....

So not the real world!

Appreciate not asked of me but my DD works NHS and they see a lot of post op infections from the private sector, she says they don't seem to have the emphasis on infection control that NHS is under.

Anecdotal i know.

Surely the private sector should be picking up the price of this? obviously not the patient but why should the tax payer fund private sector shoddiness?

The correct thing to do though would be to put pressure on the private medical providers to improve their post op infection rates.

Not to suggest leaving the patients to die if they can't afford to seek more private treatment like the OP is effectively suggesting.

But what pressure can be applied? They have no financial incentive to improve performance since they do not pay for the follow up.

Appreciate not asked of me but my DD works NHS and they see a lot of post op infections from the private sector, she says they don't seem to have the emphasis on infection control that NHS is under.
Maybe your DD works in an NHS hospital with very high infection control standards and the local private hospital isn't good, but you cannot assume that it's the same everywhere. Standards clearly vary from place to place in both sectors.
My experience has been the complete opposite. I'm still suffering long term effects of a hospital acquired infection following routine orthopaedic surgery in an NHS hospital several years ago. Not only did I get an infection in the first place, but it went undiagnosed and was inadequately treated for a considerable period of time, hence me finally turning to the private sector out of desperation. Just about every aspect of my private care has been on a completely different level to that which I received in our local NHS hospital. Now I don't doubt there are reasons for that which are completely outside the control of the frontline staff but it doesn't change the fact that I received and observed others receiving care that could at best be described as indifferent in an environment which was not particularly hygienic. And I'm paying a heavy price for that.

You get that they are still under the authority of the CQC (or other corresponding bodies in each devolved area) and the GMC and other regulatory councils?

You get there are laws and regulatory bodies who have both the means and the authority to both apply pressure or shut down a private practice that is sending out patients with a higher than expected level of infections and complications.

You have done at least 5 mins of research right, before boldly proclaiming your plan of "let them all die if they can't pay"?

Wow! 😮

You are aware that people who pay for private healthcare also pay for the NHS through general taxation and national insurance? Given that they likely have a higher income to afford private, they are also probably contributing more towards the NHS than the average person. Not only that, but by removing themselves from the waiting list for the first (hypothetically botched) operation, they would have presumably initially saved NHS time and resources and shortened the waiting list for others. Since private healthcare is designed to help people, not harm them, it would only be bad luck that they wound up needing further treatment after they received private treatment.

So, you think these people shouldn't be allowed to use the NHS, despite paying more for it and being less likely to use it? I would be careful what you wish for. If people with private healthcare should be barred from NHS care, they should have no obligation to pay for the NHS, either. Why should they be forced to fund a service that they are not allowed to use?

Also, private healthcare is not the only thing people spend money on that can cause health problems. If your line of reasoning is to be consistent, then surely no-one who pays for anything that creates an unnecessary/avoidable health problem should get NHS healthcare. Okay. What if someone pays to go ice skating and breaks their ankle? Purchases a vehicle then has a road accident? Pays for cigarettes then gets lung cancer? What if someone buys booze and then hurts themselves while drunk? A staggering amount of accidents and incidents involve alcohol consumption. If you really want to save the NHS money, refusing treatment to anyone under the influence would be a good place to start.

I doubt you believe that anyone in any of the above circumstances shouldn't have access to NHS care. So, why do you feel people deserve NHS treatment when they have invested in activities that harm their health, but don't deserve NHS treatment when they have invested in protecting their health?

This thread was about cosmetic surgery - not plastic surgery required because of a clinical reason, not joint replacements etc, purely about cosmetic surgery...

I agree completely that those in clinical need should not have to go privately, but that's a whole new thread on the state of the NHS

No, the OP has written about “private medical care”. They have not referred to cosmetic surgery in any of their posts.

Frankly this could be about private dentistry as much as anything else.