NHS cuts

[glasnost]

protest against NHS cuts

The NHS is like the story of the elephant and the six blind men. We each see only the parts of it that affect us or the people we know, and I have no idea what to think when I hear some of the horror stories. Our experiences have all been positive for the last fifty years, at least, in England and in Scotland. In that time my extended family have had road accidents, babies, broken limbs, cancer, strokes etc - all expertly dealt with. For free. I don't know anyone who has any complaints, I honestly don't.

Whether you like it or loathe it, though, the government is trying to force through changes that will make it a lot worse, imo.

@ Mellowfruitfulness :"I have already received an answer from my MP, who is totally against the NHS cuts, and calls it 'privatisation through the back door'. He says American companies are just waiting to buy up current providers, etc."

There's info here, for anyone who's interested, on the links between the Government and private healthcare and pharmaceutical companies:

www.lobbyingtransparency.org/content/view/59/1/

Thank you for the link, Cate. Here's a flavour of what they say:

'Take just one private healthcare company, General Healthcare Group (GHG), the UK?s largest private hospital firm. Its chair is Peter Gershon, who was appointed by David Cameron to advise the government on public sector spending cuts. GHG is up front about the ?opportunities? it sees from public sector reform.

GHG?s majority shareholder is Netcare, South Africa?s largest private hospital group. Netcare sees the NHS as ?one of the largest and most attractive healthcare markets globally?. According to its CEO: ?We have targeted the UK healthcare market for expansion, as the long-term demographic trends and prospects for development? offer significant future growth potential.? '

Really makes me angry. How dare these people - whether British or not - try to make a profit from us when we're ill.

It's a real eye opener, isn't it, Mellow.

They have been cutting NHS by stealth for the last 20 years.Locally it is quite clear medics have a monopoly :the same people do the medicine whether you pay or not so there is no competition HERE.We need to look at why other similar countries have overtaken us in the health stakes .... UK appears to see cutting/privatisation as the solution: others have just adapted their ways .NHS should bite the bullet and change: hard as it is.

Celibin, what do you mean, overtaken us in the health stakes? Do you mean that other countries manage to make health care provision more profitable? Or provide better health care for patients? What should be the priority of the NHS?

When is the vote Mellow? Is there somewhere to find out?

Excellent! yes, it's really important that people write to/email their MP and ask them to oppose the Health and Social Care bill if they don't want to see the NHS privatised. That's what this bill is all about, and I for one can't afford private health insurance. I think anyone with children or dependants should be especially worried because if you do have to buy health insurance, the costs are high (and if you get very ill, you may not be covered). The government has "paused" the process, which means that there is still time to stop this going through. Better still, ring your MP's office - you can put your postcode in to get their details on www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/
Arrange to go and see your MP and ask them to oppose it. There's lots of information on the website of the NHS Support Federation which you can print off and take with you www.nhscampaign.org/
They are campaigning against this bill, alongside many many others. It is so important to stop this bill. If we lose the NHS, we will never get it back.

It isn't about the costs, it's about bringing in a "managed" marketplace. The government's "reforms" will dismantle the NHS if they go through. For instance, they are removing the cap on the amount of money that hospitals can make out of private patients (at the moment it's usually around 1 - 2 %), which means that if your local hospital starts to run into difficulties financially, they might decide to increase the number of private patients they see (theoretically, they could treat ONLY private patients), and there would be nothing you or your MP could do about it.
The Public Accounts Committee published a report this week showing a great deal of concern about the lack of contingency planning - i.e. what happens if your local hospital starts to fail financially.
The other thing that is likely to happen is that hospitals will focus on "easier" treatments that they can make money out of, leaving complex cases (with no one with the responsibility to tend to these patients). I was talking to someone last night who explained how treating children with heart conditions is so much more expensive than treating adults. Under the new arrangements, a hospital could just decide to focus on adults because the "market" is better for that. Do not be fooled by this government. If they have their way, we will lose our National Health Service. I for one can't afford private health insurance. Take a look at www.nhscampaign.org/ to find out more, and make sure you email your MP and ask them to oppose the Health and Social Care bill.

Mellowfruitfulness, I have experience of 4 other comparable countries' health services both as a patient and seeing others who were patients. When I came back to the UK I realised things were sliding . One factor seems to be they have abandoned the GP system whereas we have just given them more power/money . Quicker access to a Specialist saves lives . I could expand here if required. You would be quite shocked if you knew the detail.

Germany placed on-going health care to Not-For-Profit-Companies years ago. For any chronic/pre-existing conditions you automatically see a Speciialist - like going to a dentist in the UK. They are v thorough and the battle against cancer started 30 years ago. We are so behind and we have not adapted . e.g only 1st babies need to be born in hospital : most can be born at home with midwives. We have enough hospitals in most areas to deal quickly with emergencies if one occurs.

Yes, that it what they do. Save a bit at first but in the long run it costs more. Here they sold off the land occupied by a convalescent hospital to a housing co who made a nice profit. Consequently the general hospital, which was designed for ACUTE patient care, ended up bed blocked as there was nowhere to put the largely elderly patients who just needed low-grade nursing once their acute condition had been managed. Operations for other people were delayed and the highly specialised nurses(who cost a lot) became Geriatric nurses for which they were not trained. Cost much more in the end but NHs management was not thinking long term.

Sorry, HHLimbo, I don't know, but I think Margaret answered your question.

Celibin, I wish the government looked at the health care systems in other countries and learned from them. I've often wondered why, when there is a system that is working really well somewhere, it's not copied here. But I think the answer is that the government really wants to hand over the NHS to private providers, to the people who support them. No other explanation makes sense. The NHS is a millstone round successive governments' necks, and this lot want rid. But they want rid in a way that allows them to profit from it (indirectly or directly) while not being accountable to the electorate when things go wrong.

If I thought having private providers might be good for the NHS, it wouldn't bother me, but for all the reasons mentioned by people on this thread and others, I think it would be absolutely disastrous.

Mellowfrutfulness: v perceptive comments by yourselves and others. I know people who worked so hard to build our NHS but it has already gone.Many no longer wish to work in unsafe conditions and so many medics haveemigrated. Change is of course inevitable but do people realise what it will be like to live in a US style health system? The Germans did it quite well: (though there are problems lawsuits etc) I mean did well in the sense of the provision of quality care for their people: medics are well-paid so attractive job but main provision is by Not-For -Profit so there is gentle competition.

Celibin, I just don't think there should be any competition at all between providers of healthcare. I don't see it as a marketplace. As soon as someone starts thinking that they might be able to make a profit out of providing some health treatment/op etc, their main priority has to be to make that profit, and not to provide the healthcare, imo. Their loyalties have to be to the shareholders first and then to the patient.

And it's scary how many vested interests there are (see above).

Yes, Mellowfruit, I agree and worst of all, I think taxpayers money will be used to effectively subsidize these companies !!