Migrants To Be Charged For A&E Services

[DoYouLikeMyBaubles]

www.theguardian.com/society/2013/dec/30/tourists-migrants-to-be-charged-emergency-care-nhs

Your thoughts?

yes I absolutely agree with this, why should the UK taxpayers fund health care for everyone who wishes to use it. if you cant pay at the time you should absolutely be turned away - just like in the states. in the states I was told I couldn't be treated (badly cut hand with my whole hand covered in blood and a flap of skin hanging off) until I gave them a card which could be charged or to come up with $800 in cash - I didn't have either and had to go away and get a card which took 30 mins. I also had a friend who's son took ill so they took him to a GP, after some tests turned out their son was dehydrated and was given a tin of coke and a chocolate bar and they were charged $600 - again they were told if they didn't have the money they would get no treatment.

it wont be hard to police - receptionist should ascertain if they are foreign and should ask for charge card or money - if they cant produce either they don't see doc, simple as.

MrsTerry, medical coding is a career here too. I certainly know people who specialise in billing queries as well, as figuring out which organisation to bill, even for UK citizens, is a mammoth and constantly-changing task. And, whilst clinical coding derives benefit for the healthcare system as a whole (as well as maximising revenue for the provider) I've not seen evidence that arguing over who pays overall reduces cost or waste in the system.

In the US I had to pay to for DS to see a Doctor, I also had to pay for his medication.

When we got back home we claimed it on our insurance, but it had to be paid. Why should the UK be any different, especially when its struggling.

peggy what would you do with people who could not pay - you say just turn them away. Where would you put someone who was not conscious, would you apply that to victims of crime, to people injured in RTAs, to babies etc etc.

I don't think most people in the UK would be at all comfortable with what you are suggesting TBH.

In the US and places there are hospitals and things run by charities I think? So people who have no money can access some basic care?

Not sure how it works TBH. Looking at the US healthcare wiki gave this though:

"Of 17 high-income countries studied by the National Institutes of Health in 2013, the United States had the highest or near-highest prevalence of infant mortality, heart and lung disease, sexually transmitted infections, adolescent pregnancies, injuries, homicides, and disability. Together, such issues place the U.S. at the bottom of the list for life expectancy. On average, a U.S. male can be expected to live almost four fewer years than those in the top-ranked country."

I'm not sure that this is what we should be aiming for TBH.

All the people saying "I paid when I was visiting X country": see list above.

Visitors to the UK are already supposed to pay for NHS care (unless there's a reciprocal agreement).

So this proposal is for people who aren't visitors but are living in the UK.

And this

"According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the United States spent more on health care per capita ($8,608), and more on health care as percentage of its GDP (17.2%), than any other nation in 2011. The Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States last in the quality of health care among similar countries, and notes U.S. care costs the most. In a 2013 Bloomberg ranking of nations with the most efficient health care systems, the United States ranks 46th among the 48 countries included in the study.[6][7]"

Sounds shit TBH, all in all.

Healthcare in the US is brilliant if you have lots of money, if you don't, it is shit.

But even if living in the UK (not visitors) they have to have some permit to do so.

if they cant produce either they don't see doc, simple as
peggy would you actually want people giving birth in the gutter and then dying? because that is where your super well-thought out policy would end up, as anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see.

when we were in spain last year I needed antibiotics for a urine infection - went to doc and showed them the EU card - said it didn't matter I wasn't getting medication FOC - in the end I paid for the treatment as they refused to give me it free - they told me to claim it off my holiday insurance. I have been led to believe since then it was illegal for them to do this but what do you do when you need treatment and they are refusing point blank to treat you unless you pay?

As a receptionist I was recently trying to check a patient in to a and e. When I asked how long she had been in the country for and did she have travel insurance she 'fainted' and therefore jumped the queue as we couldn't leave her lying on the floor. There was nothing wrong with her other than an old bruise. The faint was an act. When someone came to collect her he gave a completely different name for her, said she must have been confused and demanded pain relief tablets. Her English had been good until the point of insurance came up!
People will assume others identities, the charging thing will be completely unworkable.

nicetabard - if people are unconscious then no obviously you cannot turn them away however I do think once they are well enough to be spoken to about it they are.

nigellas I think people who come here to give birth should be sent home on the next flight - if they took the chance to come to this country whilst so close to giving birth they can take a chance flying back too - they are not the responsibility of the NHS. I think the current rules for people flying when pregnant need changed so less people can come here for the free health care. after reading the article posted here it seems there is a cut off limit - 36 weeks? maybe that limit needs reduced so its harder for people to get fake letters from a doc saying they are x amount weeks preg. or make it the responsibility of the airline to check with doc direct so its harder for these people to lie.

I think that we should insist on proof of insurance on point of entry to the UK. Prehaps people could be charged an upfront fee on entry depending on their health if they want to be allowed to use the NHS depending on their health. (Ie. £50 to cover insurance for a month, 10K insurance cover if you are more than 30 weeks pregnant!)

I suppose we need identiy cards to show proof of UK residency. However if someone has been in a serious car accident are doctors are really going to refuse to treat them and let them die?

Maybe we should ignore all human rights and finger print everyone who is entitled to use the NHS. People who have treatment in an emergency and then refuse to pay could be blacklisted from ever entering the UK. I am not sure how this would work with ayslum seekers or ex pats though.

Peggy - There is no way in hell an airplane is going to fly back a woman close to giving birth.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me but as Others have said it will be unworkable and no doubt handed on to Frontline staff who already have more than enough to do.

Twenty years down the line i can see us having to pay into some kind of universal health programme anyway or it will maybe go along the lines of hospitals with insurance and hospitals without so you can't just turn up at any one.

The leading cause of bankruptcy in the US, is because of medical bills. As someone born with some ongoing health problems, this kind of thing scares me shitless. I work and don't have any benefits at all, but I am a relatively heavy user of the NHS. I already find travel insurance difficult to get and expensive. Ongoing medical insurance would be a nightmare.

Everybody should be forced to have health insurance before they are allowed into our country.
No insurance, no entry.

whymewhynotim not surprised that happens but the only way to deal with it is be harsh - these people need to learn they cant take the piss - they only do it because they know they will get away with it with no consequences.

If my memories of Judge Jusy serves me correctly there are some states which make attachment of earnings to those who have outstanding medical bills such as births.

It might be expensive to run though.

grennie they fly them here so why wouldn't they fly them back?

bringbackside burns we already pay into a universal health program which we pay for - its called NI.

But NI isn't an individual pot, it just gets mixed with everything else.

peggy it is impractical and rather inhumane to send women who arrive at hospital in labour, to the airport.

You would struggle to find a cab to take them, and the costs of getting them on a flight would potentially be similar to looking after them while they gave birth anyway. Or would you send them in an ambulance?

Not sure where you're going with this idea TBH.

A woman could lie about how far along she is, but if she is being officially escorted back to the airport because she has been refused medical treatment no airline will take her.