Forum menu
Why is it wrong to make a profit from treating illness?
You might be an exception Woppit, and I'm sure you are, but most people don't want profit to be the motive behind the treatment they and their love ones receive.
You never mentioned motive and I'm not suggesting that it is. I don't see why it shouldn't be a by-product, though. We've all got to make a living.
So - what's the objection, exactly?
Can someone tell me what the best government we have said since the war?
In my 50 years whoever has been in has been hated.
Woppit,
Because then profit is the motivation for the standard of care folks get.
We've all got to make a living.
Yeah I think I'll leave it there. It's very clear that I'm not suggesting that staff in the NHS shouldn't paid a wage. I think you just want to have a silly argument.
Why would you want to risk eroding that value for money by retaining 'free at point of use' principle but forcing profit margins into the equation? it is hard enough to put on a service that balances the books for less money than and same outcomes as the old nhs provider, without then having to make a profit on it too. The profit also leaves the country in the case of many of the big boys lining up to run public services.
Why can't more people see this? I seem to have this same argument everytime. Public service being run by private business can only be a bad thing for the end user or financier. It's be exactly the same but share holders will be more important than patients.
duckman - Member
Woppit,
Because then profit is the motivation for the standard of care folks get.
That's the sort of precision I was looking for.
Good point.
It's be exactly the same but share holders will be more important than patients.
No need for them to be, happy patients and happy shareholders can exist together.
Also think of the money the taxpayer has wasted on awful IT systems, in a private system they'd need to be absorbed by the company.
[quote=hexhamstu said] It's be exactly the same but share holders will be more important than patients.
Not if the contract ties payment into patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, etc.
I've received plenty of high quality care and treatment from non NHS practitioners. In fact in my experience they have offered materially higher quality care than their NHS equivalent. The NHS was set up to provide life saving treatments, to help us into the world and to assist us at the end of our lives (when that was expected to be 65). Quite simply the NHS cannot cope with what it's being asked to do today, we either all need to pay much higher taxes or accept the NHS cannot do everything it's being asked to. My mother has been in agony for 6 months as the NHS could not or would not treat her, the private cost of her diagnosis and treatment was about £1,000. The NHS is in a very bad way, it needs a material overhaul, it most certainly does not need more money just thrown at it.
The NHS absolutely has to make treatment decisions based upon cost, it runs to a budget and different treatments cost different amounts. There is little difference between that and operating for profit.
It is possible to have a private hospital which operates not for profit.
Its very very hard to find anyone in this country willing to criticise the NHS or want to replace it
Hey Junkyard, you've been talking to the wrong people. 🙂
I would happily criticise my old GP surgery all day long.
A bunch of incompetent a holes who should be struck off and I would like to do a lot worse.
My new GP is excellent.
And making a profit for carrying out a service I dont have a problem with.
I have paid for laser surgery. £3k for a NHS surgeon to treat me.
I am more than happy for him and his colleagues to make a profit from that.
He works 4 days a week as a NHS consultant and 1 day a week private.
I dont see the problem.
The NHS need protecting from the public as much as from mismanagement and unrealistic expectations.
Exactly @Sancho.
What I like about the French system for example is if you chose to go "private" you get part of the bill paid for by the state. So you can chose state, ie all paid for. Or a different provider but get the state equivalent amount refunded. So for the sake of argument state Doctors visit £50 and paid for, private doctor £75 but £50 refunded and £25 you pay either personally or by insurance (which is proper private insurance with pre existing conditions covered)
I am now a long term burden on the NHS.
I am taking about 7-10 tablets a day.
So what is the difference between Glaxo/Pfizer etc making a profit for treating my condition versus a Private surgical company treating my condition.
Both private, both making a profit and both making we well again.
(well keeping me alive)
I don't get the froth when talking about private treatment of patients.
There are plenty of "charities" (Read that as businesses with a clever mechanism of not declaring accounts) that treat people all day long and no one bats an eye lid.
[i]While anguished speculation about Where the Left Goes Now continues unabated, the Right isn't going anywhere. It doesn't have to – it has stuff to do. David Cameron now has a majority in the Commons and is hoping to push some controversial measures through while his political opponents are either resigning, un-resigning or polishing their CVs for leadership contests.
So let us leave the hand-wringing and hysterics aside for a second, calmly appraise the measures the Tories have pledged to introduce and consider how they might affect ordinary people across the UK.[/i]
Human Rights
Snooper Charter
Green Energy Subsidies
unions and Employment Rights
Constituency Boundaries
[url= http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/tory-policy-explained-748 ]Vice News: All those Nasty tory policies[/url]
Plenty of private sector involvement in the NHS, much of it doing very little for patient care:
http://nhaspace.com/2015/02/19/5-forms-of-nhs-privatisation-you-should-know-about/
In fact, (under both NuLab & current Gov, but greatly accelerated by the woeful '12 HaSC) current reforms have simply pushed up costs [i]and[/i] bureaucracy. "Free at the point of use" is just weasel-words: smooth talk for handing services to the loss-leading, risk-avoiding, profit-bet likes of Virgin & Care_UK. None of which is leading to a demonstrable improvement in outcomes.
Continental healthcare systems aren't doing more-for-less. The issue isn't a pretence that the NHS is perfect - it isn't - it's that [b]good value[/b] services are being very deliberately fragmented.
I think you are being disingenuous noteeth.
Plenty of private sector involvement doing a great deal for the NHS.
The PFI is a disaster for the NHS, and so are those in the website, but that is not the full picture.
But still no problem with private drug suppliers, how much of the budget is drugs?
I think you are being disingenuous noteeth.
Yawn. Are you denying that it is happening?
But still no problem with private drug suppliers.
I have no problem with "the private sector" or "the market" - but I have a big fugging problem with the rhetoric currently being used to justify reforms which are wrecking what the NHS can (and does) do well.
Do you not read what I said.
I just acknowledged the points in the email dumb-ass.
I am pointing out to you, thet there is a lot of private sector involvement that is doing a great deal.
but maybe you need pictures.
I just acknowledged the points in the email dumb-ass.
Easy now... watch your blood pressure.
The NHS relies upon private suppliers for everything from IV bungs to fancy electric beds? Well, knock me down with a feather.
It still doesn't justify much of the recent reform. And given the likely direction at DoH, I'd like to know exactly what people think they are voting for.
[i]maybe you need pictures[/i]
Yes please - perhaps one of a transit van painted like an ambulance, and being driven by a taxi-crew.
Has this been covered yet?
http://benjaminstudebaker.com/2015/05/02/britain-for-the-love-of-god-please-stop-david-cameron/
1: It isn't, but then nobody said it was.2: They aren't.
Woppit how can you possible claim no 2.
Did you read the article about the man dying of cancer who was told to find work and had his benefits stopped for missing appointments?
Atos scandal: Benefits bosses admit over half of people ruled fit to work ended up destitutePUBLIC fury is growing towards the French IT firm for their role in helping the Con-Dem government slash benefits.
Iain Duncan Smith, Secretary of State for Work and PensionsIain Duncan Smith, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
MORE than HALF of people stripped of disability benefits after being ruled “fit for work” by Atos were left unemployed and without income, according to a Government study.
The Department for Work and Pensions, who hired the French IT firm to help them slash the benefits bill, have admitted finding out in a survey that 55 per cent of people who lost benefits in the crackdown had failed to find work.
Only 15 per cent were in jobs, with 30 per cent on other benefits.
The DWP claimed people left high and dry were given “tailored support” to find jobs.
But the extent of the hardship suffered by the Atos victims in the study will only add to the growing public fury about the firm and their methods.
Atos have assessed patients with terminal illnesses as “fit for work”. And thousands of victims of genuine, chronic conditions have complained of being humiliated by the company’s tests.
So far, Citizens Advice Scotland have received a shocking 24,000 complaints about Atos, who rake in £110million a year from the taxpayer for their controversial work.
The extent of unemployment among people denied benefits after Atos assessments was revealed by the DWP after a Freedom of Information request.
Why not just admit that you don't actually give a shit about the people being left destitute by the government you voted for, because that's the reality isn't it.
David Cameron criticised over welfare reforms by 26 Church of England bishops who say 'national crisis' is causing poverty and malnutrition
Leading figures from Church of England, Methodist church, the United Reform Church and Quakers all signed open letter to David Cameron
In it they say welfare reform has created a 'national crisis'
They accuse Government of using in 'punitive sanctions' against claimants
They say people are now having to chose between heating and eating
Half a million have used food banks since last Easter and 5,500 have been treated in hospital for malnutrition, letter says
This is despite living in one of the richest countries in the world. Tory voters - I hope you're all proud of yourselves
@grum given those stories you posted perhaps there should be some questions asked as to what the £280 billion being spent on welfare and the NHS is being used for. If what you say is true it's clearly not being spent wisely.
If the Labour party had not run up such a deficit and spending commitments in the good years, post the crises perhaps whatever government followed could have spent more and cut less.
Oh right, it's still all Labour's fault. 🙄
You're passing the buck - YOU voted for this, YOU are responsible for ruining these people's lives. Take a bit of ****ing responsibility
Disabled people set to lose £28.3bn of support
- Thousands of disabled people will be hit simultaneously by up to six different welfare cuts
- Disabled people will lose £28.3bn of support by 2018
- Up to 3.7 million disabled people affected in total
- Demos calls on the Government to publish the cumulative impact of multiple cuts to benefits
- Scope asks where disabled people fit in to Chancellor’s ‘aspiration nation’?
not wanting to argue against your points grum.
But, I didnt hear anywhere in the election any mention of the ATOS disability issue.
It wasnt raised by Labour the SNP or anyone.
maybe if it had more people would have voted differently.
@Julian whilst you deride the concept of profit margin in the NHS the vast majority of the medicines you'll be given will have been researched, developed, produced and sold with that in mind.
Sorry to return to this s late, been seeing nhs patients all day. Unbelievably none of the ones i saw today are on any form of medication whatsoever. I think i am seeing two this week that are! At a 'retail' cost of a total of about £50 a month for both of them. One is on a particularly expensive drug that is unusual in my field, would usually be a few quid a month per patient in meds if they are prescribed any at all.
Of course jambalaya, plenty more are on, errr, plenty more than that, and plenty stand absolutely zero chance of recovery or even survival without medicine, yet I wonder if you know what proportion if the annual nhs budget is actually spent on medication? of course you know what single cost is by far the largest component of healthcare...