PDA

View Full Version : out of the UK: "Letting the patients choose can only be healthy"


Peanut
05-14-2005, 08:03 AM
Letting the patient choose can only be healthy
(Filed: 14/05/2005)

Can it have been only last week that Labour was making our flesh creep about the "Tory plans to privatise the NHS"?

Now here is Patricia Hewitt, the new Health Secretary, privatising a chunk of the NHS. How else are we to define the provision of 1.7 million operations by private contractors for profit? And a good thing, too.

The patients who benefit from this expanded capacity will enjoy one huge advantage over those treated within the state sector, namely a contractual relationship with their health provider.

Instead of being supplicants, made to feel grateful for whatever they get, they will be customers, able to claim redress if they are unhappy with the service.

Step by slow step, Britain is joining the modern world. Elsewhere, patients take for granted the ability to choose between state-run and independent hospitals. A third of French and half of German hospitals are operated privately.

Over the past decade, the Soviet bloc has moved from NHS-style monopoly provision to insurance-based systems. When Fidel Castro dies, Britain will be left with the last Marxist healthcare model in the world.

Although they are good news for patients, Labour's reforms must be maddening for the Conservatives. At every election, Labour conjures the gruesome spectre of a "two-tier health system", in which the rich go private while the rest must make do with what they can get. http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/05/14/dl1401.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/05/14/ixopinion.html (article continues...)

Do you agree or disagree with this column's statements?

Please do not bash my sources. If the source is unacceptable or drivel to you, post debateable topics from more "reputable" sources, IYHO. Play nice, in other words!

Dandi
05-14-2005, 01:07 PM
"At every election, Labour conjures the gruesome spectre of a "two-tier health system", in which the rich go private while the rest must make do with what they can get.'

Well smack my mouth and call me Marie Antoinette. My family forgoes some nice items because we consider it a priority to pay high premiums for premium healthcare. We don't want average or crappy healthcare for free.

We aren't rich....but I'd go for a two-tier health system. :lol

I don't understand why everyone should settle for crappy care just becuase some people aren't willing to fork over $$ for it. That doesn't make sense.

What's next? The end of private schooling? Or what about...everyone has to drive Hyundais because it's not fair that some people can afford Cadillacs? :lol

Scarlet
05-14-2005, 06:58 PM
yeah, cos 'for profit' care is always sooo much better. Like for instance when the group my ob/gyn was in (half way through my pg) decided that the obs were costing them way too much money so they should *double* their patient load. The OBs refused so the medical group dropped *80* doctors. There was one in the whole of San Diego that would take me and he had no appointments within several months.

The NHS has some serious flaws (mostly due to cutbacks) but for many reasons I'd rather have it back rather than the system we have now. For one, you don't get kicked out of hospital within 24 hours of gall bladder surgery with no home medical support.