OK so ethically where do you lie with regards to private health insurance?

[Curmudgeonlett]

is it a good thing to use it because you're covered and it takes the financial burden off your GP and into the private sector?

or

is it ethically wrong because you get seen sooner than NHS patients?

No, I don't see it as ethically wrong.

In fact, if you're in the private sector, you could argue that you've removed yourself from the NHS, thus allowing someone else in the NHS to be seen more quickly.

i dont have it to take the financial burden off my gp we have it so that if anything is wrong with any of us (which has happened twice this year) we can be seen within a week, not a year.

It may be ethically wrong but sadly the nhs isnt working and people suffer because they cant pay for treatment in that respect we are no different from those countries who have private health.
The NHS is great if you have some terrible emergency but anything else (chronic pain for example and youre on the list)

I don't think it does take the burden off your GP - don't you still have to see your GP to get a referral even if you have private health insurance?

If nobody ever went private, the system would be fairer because everyone would get seen in turn. But all the good doctors would probably go to the US.

I thought GPs had annual budgets of NHS resources though.

Is it ethically wrong to choose to be treated in another area in order to be seen sooner?

but geographical is probably not as much a constraint as the financial cost of phi and hence is open to the vast majority so not the same ethical dilemma surely?

My DH, DC's and I have private Healthcare cover because my employer offers it as a benefit - I still paid annually for it but get it cheaper. I have had to use it twice, Tonsilectomy (SP?) and to have a tumour removed from my face - and had no doubts about going private - especially for the tumour as I had just lost my Dad to cancer and wanted to get this thing off me asap. I wanted to ensure DC's had a Mum to look after them.

So for me - no it's not wrong. I also wanted to ensure I got in operated on and home to the DC's asap so they would not suffer from my absence.

I also would not hesitiate to go private if anything was wrong with any of them.

Appreciate that every one's opinion will depend on their circumstances - but you can at least look at it from different POV if people post.

I would rarther go private, my ds had a rash the other day, and got fobbed off with the nurse practioner, why can't he see a doctor FGS. Even with private insurance you have to get a GP referral. I think we should have choice.

No, because many people don't know how to work the system, and just blindly go along with the queue that they're put in. Nonetheless going to another area for treatment takes some burden off the NHS in your own area, but surely does not add to the burden in the other area because they already have availablity. Similarly using phi - or even private treatment out of your own pocket - takes the burden off the NHS.

Though it doesn't take the burden off the GP, but off the medics that the GP refers you to.

It's ethically wrong because i cvan't afford it.....

Actually, no we can't afford it, but for anything serious I would always use the NHS anyway. I would never have an operation in a private hospital that didn't have an intensive care / HDU or full range of emergency back-up. But would probably enjoy the superior food and comfort, once I was sitting up in bed. Also, short wating times for non-dangerous, but 'quality of life' problems.

So, financially and pragmatically - no, wouldn't pay out, even if I had the cash.

Phi is open to far more people than they realise. If a smoker stopped smoking they would easily afford phi.

Its ethically wrong and plain wrong in my view! Fine if you're in 100% health but wait till you start getting ill frequently, or arrest during surgery (straight to NHS A&E) or worse still if you end up with a chronic condition such as diabetes or arthritis - you will end up with exclusions galore on your policy. You only have to look at attached guardian article about the American system to see where increased private care will get us. this article

oh indeedy .. we have been hit hard by the chronic conditions clause

Nothing to do with ethicaaly wrong. Only pay it to get seen sooner. NHS is so rubbish. I predict that the UK will turn into the US before long anyway.

I sincerely hope it doesn't, oblomov.

I am very very lucky, perhaps, but give or take some extreme frustration with support services, We have had excellent service from birth for DS's orthopaedic condition. I was a member of an American board for a while 9as DS's condition is quite rare) and reading posts from parents whose children had 'used up' their insurance's quota for physio, surgery, special shoes, splints, or whatever, and were literally ahving to sell houses. And these were people in good jobs, with comprehensive insurance cover. if you have something that requires serious ongoing treatment, you can find yourself royally f**d
DS's consultant is a specialist in paediatric orthopaedics - if we went private, she would probably be doing the op anyway.

Blu - I wish we weren't going towards a US system, but I can ONLY see that we unfortunately are - our A&E is one of the best in the world, I think. But if you want an operation.... My dh had private keyhole surgery on his knee last week - torn catillage. When he saw his Gp, prior to going private, he said:
"The honest thruth is, I have a 12 month, yes a 12 month waiting list, for my TERMINAL cancer patients"

I think that sums it up, don't you ?

Private care doesn't necessarily relieve the burden on the NHS. In our area at home you see the same specialists as you'd see on the NHS, just in a different building.

I agree with blue, I wouldn't use private for any major operation. And by the way, I don't know in England, but in Italy, try to get a major operation in a private hospital after a certain age... almost impossible, they certainly don't want bad statistics.

Most consultants have private lists though and that is not using up an NHS resource it is using up a private place

You can see a private GP eg at London Waterloo there is a walk in GP - you pay heavily but you get to see someone straight away at a time that suits you.

We also have a private A & E near us

For anything really serious the nhs are brilliant.

although sometimes to get to the diagnosis you have to wait an inordinate length of tme

but have to agree, when its good the NHS can be exceptional

Meh, private patients make up about half of the private sector's patients IMO.

I don't care either way - IME the care is not any better in fact in some cases worse.

Oh I see a difference between seeing the consultant more quickly and having the op private - consultant is the same either way obv.

I've used to get physio for an injury the GP didn't even rate as worthy of referral until I said I had health insurance and for a dental op that I'd have waited ages for on NHS , assuming they'd even do it rather than just pull the tooth. If dd needs an eye op we'll probably go private as that gives us greater continuity of care. None of this is at the expense of someone else who is reliant on the NHS.