Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

We need to start charging for NHS services

750 replies

Fragmentedbrain · 28/07/2025 11:03

£15 for the GP
£20 for A&E
NHS routes to paid-for fast track treatment
Options to pay for nicer rooms

We need to stop putting working people on disability benefits for want of a functioning health service it's barbaric

OP posts:
MyQuirkyTraybake · 28/07/2025 14:14

We already pay for the NHS - taxes!

Womblingmerrily · 28/07/2025 14:14

I agree with payments. People overuse the NHS massively - they go to their GP demand antibiotics - get told it's viral, disagree, got to A&E, get told it's viral, call 111 and lie about symptoms - get OOH who can't see or examine them and finally get what they want. Next day they call GP again and say antibiotics aren't working - because it's XXXX viral!!! and so on it goes.

There is an excellent NHS website which gives clear information on where to go and what the red flags for most common illnesses. People utterly ignore it and instead respond to constant media scare stories to assume the most minor of symptoms must be serious.

Mumsnet does this all the time 'go with your gut, check it out, ignore the Dr, get a second opinion' - if you don't trust trained HCPs then don't waste their time - just treat yourself with crystals or something.

What everyone should be doing is using the St John's ambulance FREE first aid resources to develop basic first aid skills. This is an adult responsibility to have these basic life skills.

Everyone should pay something. I think this should be related to their income standard/low income/unwaged - different charges. Having groups who don't pay mean groups that have no incentive not to overuse - and they do.

Those saying people are going to die are being hyperbolic - paying some level of co-pay is normal in most western countries and they are not dying more than we are here - they are dying less.

Look after yourself as much as you can, use the free resources available to inform yourself and be prepared to pay for the resources that you use.

Rant over.

XXLfiles · 28/07/2025 14:14

Truffleshuffle84 · 28/07/2025 14:02

My DH (works. For the NHS) says this

Criticising the NHS feels like it's almost unpatriotic and so prevents people from actually saying it's not fit for purpose in many cases

Yes it saves lives, people on this thread I'm sure will owe their lives to the NHS and it staff

But that doesn't mean it should be protected as is at all costs.

I think the "love" is actually intentional at this point. People will be incredibly resistant to change until it falls apart completely and full privatisation, very expensive to users (but money making) system has to be implemented. Instead of admitting it needs change and implementing imho well measured tried and tested systems like quite a few on the continent have.
Even the messaging during covid was very much forcing in the "I❤️NHS" message.
"stay home, protect the NHS, save lives" while for example where my family lives (eu) had "stay home, support our healthcare staff, save lives". Subtle but big difference.

Lioncub2020 · 28/07/2025 14:15

We charge for the Dentist and the Optician so I don't see why we don't for the Doctor.

EyeLevelStick · 28/07/2025 14:15

CraftyNavySeal · 28/07/2025 11:55

Private means run for profit. I pay the council for a parking permit, I pay TFL for a tube ticket, doesn’t mean they are private services.

Portugal has an NHS but you have to pay a fee for appointments.

If we want a healthcare system we have to pay for it, currently we are not paying enough. Somebody has to so why not the people who are actually using it.

You say that like using it is a lifestyle choice.

ridl14 · 28/07/2025 14:16

Notonthestairs · 28/07/2025 14:13

paragraphs from the Kings Fund -

“Second, in the long term, there is no evidencethat suggests any specific funding models routinely delivers a better health care systemthan any other. In fact, what tends to differentiate performance of health systems is the level of investment rather than underlying model of funding. This would suggest that a lengthy, costly and disruptive transition to social insurance is unlikely to deliver significant improvements in and of itself, without a corresponding increase in investment.

Third, self-pay and expanding charges would have ramifications for health inequalities for those unable to afford them and would also be unlikely to reduce pressure on the NHS. Furthermore, those who delay or avoid care due to cost could increase demand for expensive treatments, and this could also result in poorer health outcomes. All the different models still need a tax-funded safety net, and if this is not adequately funded and resourced there will be implications for health inequalities.
Finally, in the short term, there are significant challenges facing the NHS that these alternatives do not help to tackle. None of the alternatives proposed above would in and of themselves increase the capacity of the health care sector and so there would be no meaningful impact on improving access or reducing the backlogs of care more quickly. They would not result in more beds, diagnostics equipment, or improvements in the state of NHS buildings. Neither would they overcome the significant workforce challenges in the NHS, which require action to boost recruitment and retain existing staff. Likewise, to improve health outcomes requires action on both the quality of health care and also societal action on the wider determinants of health, which these alternatives do not guarantee.
England needs to improve both health and care delivery and health outcomes. Doing this requires additional investment particularly on capital (buildings and equipment), fundamental changes to social care funding and provision, a comprehensive approach to improving the wider determinants of health and governments adopting a long-term perspective to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past on issues such as workforce planning. None of the ‘radical’ alternative models would be an immediate or targeted solution to the challenges facing the NHS. In fact, each would bring their own drawbacks as well as benefits and introducing any of these would bring significant disruption. Tackling the challenges is better done through improving our current health care system rather than jumping ‘out of the frying pan and into the fire’.”

There isn’t an easy answer and the social insurance model (which I am very interested in) will require more not less government investment.
That’s not a reason to look into it - but we should be wary of anyone selling it as an easy answer.

Thank you! Very well explained

EyeLevelStick · 28/07/2025 14:17

Lioncub2020 · 28/07/2025 14:15

We charge for the Dentist and the Optician so I don't see why we don't for the Doctor.

Is access to dentistry in the UK equitable and affordable?

VioletandDill · 28/07/2025 14:17

CinnamonCinnabar · 28/07/2025 12:52

Also the increase in very expensive therapies, particularly for cancer.

People are likely to survive cancer but then have long term complications of treatment - the cancer charities don't like to talk about the difficulties of being a 'surviver' with early menopause, infertility, cognitive problems and the late complications of radiotherapy to look forward to. All that longterm care is expensive.

I'm curious to know what you mean by this - that we should not be using the more expensive, but more life-saving treatments for cancer?
I've got cancer and have had/am recieving two particularly expensive therapies - one type of chemo because I was having big allergic reactions to the less expensive one, and Keytruda, which allows my immune system to fight the cancer and is probably a big factor in reducing the tumour down to almost nothing/is likely to lessen the chance of the cancer coming back. Are you objecting to me having those treatments?

askmenow · 28/07/2025 14:18

DemonsandMosquitoes · 28/07/2025 11:39

Everyone? Children, those on benefits, the elderly? Remember the WFA outcry!!
Just leaving the poor sods in the squeezed middle yet again.
Most of my clinic non attenders are over 65.

If most of your non attendees are over 65’s, quite easy resolution, send a reminder text the day before and another on the day.

Our GP has an automated system set up for that as do our HA, and also the pharmacy attached to the GP. Absolutely invaluable.

You have to accept that many elderly are more forgetful, are easily distracted & take longer over doing stuff.

Until you’re there you won’t realise how difficult life becomes.

Vroomfondleswaistcoat · 28/07/2025 14:19

I used to be all for free at the point of treatment NHS. Now I am starting to see that perhaps charging for some areas might be the way forward. Maybe charging for missed appointments (unless for a very good reason which could be proven). I was thinking maybe also charge for misuse of A&E until I remember that some elderly people might be put off going to A&E (or calling an ambulance) because they 'don't want to be charged for wasting their time' - even when it's vital that they are seen. Those who are most vulnerable are often those who are the most cautious about misusing the facilities.

Oasisagiger · 28/07/2025 14:19

Thricewomen · 28/07/2025 14:13

People do get to see a doctor now, its just not as quick as anyone would want. Under the proposed system there would be people who literally could not see a doctor due to cost.

But there would be help for those on low incomes etc in the same way there is now for the majority of things.

ShesTheAlbatross · 28/07/2025 14:20

InterestQ · 28/07/2025 11:39

I agree - though anyone on UC or benefits like pension credit should be exempt.

I think £10 for a GP appointment if you’re over 18 and a fine if you don’t bother turning up would stop time wasters booking in the first place.

If you end up in A&E as a result of too much alcohol (injury or needing stomach pumped) you should have to pay the cost of your treatment - or £100 or whatever. Same goes for drug related injuries.

Children and those on benefits can carry on as usual.

Edited

I think if you were going to introduce a fine for missed appointments, then I wouldn’t exempt anyone from that on financial grounds. It’s not preventing them accessing medical treatment due to cost (which I’d agree is unethical), it’s about deterring people from cancelling and leaving appointments wasted.

Thricewomen · 28/07/2025 14:20

Me and my husband have no children and no UC, we are not high earners. We make about £56k between us both a year. With the COL every penny is accounted for and I would probably just put off seeing a Dr if I had to pay. We have very little in the way of luxuries so where do I cut back? We finished the month (I got paid today) with £5.64 in our bank

This is exactly what I am talking about.

And the NHS is a system horribly filled with inefficiencies and waste. Just one example, my son saw a consultant who wanted bloods done. The bloods are done in the same clinic we were in. Instead of us being able to book in whilst we were there, the consultant needed to write to the GP, who then wrote to me to call him, and when I did he agreed to get the bloods arranged ( there was never any possibility of him disagreeing with the bloods being done),he then had to call the clinic I was originally at to arrange a date,, and then he had to call me back to tell me the date.

Idiotic waste like this is replicated throughout the NHS. What a waste of GP time and consultant time and admin time. What a stupid delay for the patient. So no, I don't think patients should have to pay, and especially not whilst the service is ridden with inefficiency they have designed in.

ThunderyDays · 28/07/2025 14:24

Vroomfondleswaistcoat · 28/07/2025 14:19

I used to be all for free at the point of treatment NHS. Now I am starting to see that perhaps charging for some areas might be the way forward. Maybe charging for missed appointments (unless for a very good reason which could be proven). I was thinking maybe also charge for misuse of A&E until I remember that some elderly people might be put off going to A&E (or calling an ambulance) because they 'don't want to be charged for wasting their time' - even when it's vital that they are seen. Those who are most vulnerable are often those who are the most cautious about misusing the facilities.

I think misuse is a tough one - some things are best treated at a&e despite not outwardly presenting as an emergency.

to prevent the misuse of a&e (and I am aware that this would take a considerable amount of money, I’m not saying they will implement this overnight) they need to bring a&e, MIUs and UTCs together to be in the same place, ideally with a GP and pharmacy there as well.

you have the triage nurse (I think it’s a nurse? Was last time I was there) working like normal. You present and get sent to the correct place, or an appointment booked for you at your own gp.

Zebedee999 · 28/07/2025 14:24

milkandhoney2 · 28/07/2025 11:24

How does that work if you’re on min wage with health conditions that mean you’re likely at the GP twice a month? Because I couldn’t afford that

Get a better paying job I suppose.

UsingAMansNameInAWomensWorld · 28/07/2025 14:25

We pay via taxes

Those who would get an exemption are those who already don't pay - children, elderly, benefits, disabled

If they tried to introduce a charge then people would demand a reduction in taxes which would cause more issues

Thricewomen · 28/07/2025 14:26

Oasisagiger · 28/07/2025 14:19

But there would be help for those on low incomes etc in the same way there is now for the majority of things.

Edited

As I have already stated. There are plenty of families with two working adults who are struggling to pay bills. Speak to any food bank and they will tell you about the upsurge in working people needed to use the food bank. These people would not get any help as their incomes are not low enough and yet they still don't have a spare £15 for a GP appointment.

There is growing resentment from working families about the fact that they have done everything right yet they still don't have a secure or decent standard of living, can't buy their own home etc. If they also don't get free healthcare whilst those who don't work full time do, this is just going to fuel a growing resentment and divide in society. People feel that society is no longer just and no longer working for them. This is not a good place for society to be. Just look at all the threads on here about how council tenants should not have secure tenancies. that is fuelled by working people no longer being able to buy their own home.

Thricewomen · 28/07/2025 14:27

Zebedee999 · 28/07/2025 14:24

Get a better paying job I suppose.

So who is going to do the minimum wage jobs? Or should those people be allowed to get sick and die?

Vaxtable · 28/07/2025 14:30

I believe those that miss appointments should be charged

RichardMarxisinnocent · 28/07/2025 14:30

Arlanymor · 28/07/2025 11:42

Well then it's not the NHS is it.

It's private healthcare - the whole ethos of the NHS is that it is free at the point of use. That's why it was set up in the first place.

People can choose to go private if they wish. The options you've outlined are already available - paying for nicer rooms, to fast track - you're talking about private medicine.

It is possible in some hospitals to pay extra for a nicer room but still have NHS treatment, it's called an amenity bed.

UsingAMansNameInAWomensWorld · 28/07/2025 14:31

Lioncub2020 · 28/07/2025 14:15

We charge for the Dentist and the Optician so I don't see why we don't for the Doctor.

And people don't go to the dentist (well, they can't find them either) or optician unless they absolutely have to rather than going for regular check ups which could catch problems sooner...

Paying for a GP appointment would stop people going because "it's not so bad" until they end up seriously ill and needing far more treatment than they would have had they gone for the GP appointment and had an issue caught sooner

EviesHat · 28/07/2025 14:31

Zebedee999 · 28/07/2025 14:24

Get a better paying job I suppose.

Nursery workers aren’t paid very much. Perhaps parents should pay more - a lot more - for childcare so the nursery workers receive a better wage?

That’s what you mean, isn’t it?

EviesHat · 28/07/2025 14:33

Fragmentedbrain · 28/07/2025 11:03

£15 for the GP
£20 for A&E
NHS routes to paid-for fast track treatment
Options to pay for nicer rooms

We need to stop putting working people on disability benefits for want of a functioning health service it's barbaric

Would you include charges for maternity services and ante-natal appointments?

Lioncub2020 · 28/07/2025 14:34

UsingAMansNameInAWomensWorld · 28/07/2025 14:31

And people don't go to the dentist (well, they can't find them either) or optician unless they absolutely have to rather than going for regular check ups which could catch problems sooner...

Paying for a GP appointment would stop people going because "it's not so bad" until they end up seriously ill and needing far more treatment than they would have had they gone for the GP appointment and had an issue caught sooner

I think paying for your own health care should encourage more people to stay "match fit". Although the US is an obvious example of where this hasn't worked for everyone.

AngelicKaty · 28/07/2025 14:34

Fragmentedbrain · 28/07/2025 11:03

£15 for the GP
£20 for A&E
NHS routes to paid-for fast track treatment
Options to pay for nicer rooms

We need to stop putting working people on disability benefits for want of a functioning health service it's barbaric

But then you'd be charging those very same working people for access to their GP and to A&E - many of those working people will be on National Minimum Wage and wouldn't be able to afford to pay, so would be denied healthcare altogether (just as is the case for 28m people in the US without health insurance - and that's the figure from before Trump came into office for a second term i.e before he gutted Medicaid and Medicare). Not only does your proposal not solve the problem, but it would actually make it much worse for the poorest in society. Beware the law of unintended consequences OP.