�20 charge to see your doctor

[Gromit]

Patients should be charged �20 to see a GP in a bid to limit demands placed on the health service, a centre-right think-tank says.

The NHS is already looking to make savings and the think-tank said there was little appetite for tax rises.
Instead, they said charging for GPs would be a good way to reduce demand.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8156279.stm

A good idea?

[rov1200]

By paying for appointments you are going along the American model which is so despised. It will only lead to more self diagnosis and remedies found on the internet.

[youngmafbog]

Fine, charge but then stop the pretence that the Employee and Emploer stamp are for health when they are not.

There are measures that could be bought in that stopped the problem but where do you stop. For instance you could say that those on benefits dont pay. But those on benefits are often less well than others so visit more (plus they dont pay EHI either) but you cant just chuck someone out in the cold to die becasue they cant afford it. You could perhaps issue all with 5 visits a year (or whatever). To exceed this you must have a special case stamped by the doctor. This covers long term illness.
Another thing against this is that curing something early is cheaper. If for instance I was worried about some lumps catching them before the Cancer (if it was) grew would be far cheaper and more benefical to all. If I left it as I was too mean (most probable) then who knows.

Quite simply there is no easy answer on this one.

[jno]

it's strange, but I find it hard to tell a bogus asylum seeker from a real asylum seeker, let alone distinguishing them from proper human beings. Call me insensitive.

[sqad617]

rov.

"By paying for appointments you are going along the American model which is so despised"

By whom?

[shaneystar2]

I think in America you are obliged to have some sort of private health insurance .Correct me if I am wrong .If you haven't you get billed.
We pay for the NHS through our contributions deducted from our salaries .I wouldn't mind paying a small fee if it meant I could see my doctor when I wanted to instead of when the snotty receptionist says I can .
But ,not everyone can afford to pay .
If they got rid of some of the beancounters ,adminstrators and penpushers they might have more in the pot .
On a recent visit to hospital I was amazed at the amount of people sat behind desks pushing paper around .They were carting great huge files around the place in trolleys !
My surgery has six doctors and 25 administrative staff .
What on earth are they administrating ?
I have a sneaking feeling they want to gradually abolish the NHS and make us pay at the point of sale or take out private insurance. I shall probably be dead by then though:)

[bednobs]

while i am against paying for healthcare in principle, i find the idea of paying to see a gp intriging - on the one hand it seems like a really good idea, stoping the malingerers and people who see dr smith at 10:45 every other wednesday and have done so for years, come out of their appt and make another, and those people who make an appointment and dont turn up.
On the other hand i would worry that poor people would be even more disadvantaged healthwise than they already are - ie they are really ill but dont go to the docs cause they dont have 20 quid, and i worry about people (like me) who have to see their gp about 10 times a year.
perhaps a compromise of a tenner each time, plus an option for a season ticket!
it WILL happen, im sure of it (look at dentistry and optical care over the last 20 years - it's completely accepted nw that you have to pay

[birdie1971]

This is the slippery slope. Once you're charged to see your GP where will it end? We're already charged for seeing our NHS dentist (if you're lucky enough to be able to find one) and I personally think that that's a disgrace.

When the NHS was founded, the Government produced a leaflet in 1948 explaining what this new thing was. The leaflet reads:

�Your new NHS begins on the 5th July. What is it and how do you get it? It will provide you with all medical, dental and nursing care. Everyone, rich or poor, man, woman or child can use it or any part of it. There are no charges except for a few special items and there are no insurance qualifications but it is not a charity. You are paying for it mainly as tax payers and it will relieve your money worries in times of illness.�

It could be argued that seeing your dentist or your GP comes under the 'special items' clause but I suggest that it's a pretty weak argument.

The statement, �... it will relieve your money worries in times of illness� is hardly consistent with a �20 charge to see your GP.

[karenmac60]

They should charge hypochondriacs, lonely old ladies who just want a chat and skivers on invalidity who need their sicklines updated (and I only mean the skivers - I know there are plenty of genuinely ill people out there who can't work, but since they got everyone off the dole and onto invalidity its impossible to get an appointment at my surgery - or walk down the street without seeing some ned in a shellsuit with a walking stick!!!!)

[sqad617]

birdie...that was in 1945...............Present time is quite different.

Nothing is forever.

The NHS funded just by taxes and NI contributions is not sustainable.

Problem is, NHS is the only thing that 95% of the population has ever known. Which political party is going to tell the electorate the basic facts?

[sqad617]

birdie...sorry...1948.

[Gromit]

sqad617

We were a much poorer country in 1948 (we were bankrupt) when the NHS was set up. Despite the present economic situation, we are still an extremely wealthy nation.

[sqad617]

Gromit.....NHS costs about �12.5 Billion per year.....Billion!

There is no doubt that cuts will have to be made in the budgets whoever gets in and whatever they say, the NHS will be affected.

[ummmm]

I was always surprised at how little NI I paid..!!

[carrot99]

I work part-time and paid �154 NI this month - I can't remember the last time I went to the doctor.

[sqad617]

carrot....very little of that goes to the NHS......the majority of it goes to your retirement pension.

[carrot99]

I'd forgotten about my state pension - you're right!

[poltergeist]

so long as the asylum seekers and immigrants dont have to pay then that will make me happy

[jake-the-peg]

Squad - I wouldn't use the word "despised"

But the American model is very expensive for the quality of service they get

Says Who? Well WHO actually

The UK system ranks 18th in the World -the US 37th despite spending more of their GDP than any other on health
.
And don't be fooled into thinking that your current health insurance would cover you in a US type system.

When did you last see a BUPA Emergency Ambulance?

The average cost for a familly of 4 in the US is $12,000 a year

And the insurence model becomes difficult if you have long term health issues or have the misfortune to become old.

18% of Americans over 65 have no health insurance

[sqad617]

jake........you have misquoted me......it was rov......I was quoting HIM

[jake-the-peg]

So sorry - You questioned the use of despised and I foolishly thought that meant that you thought it was a good system.

Of course what makes the NHS unsustainable is our aging population.

Now there are 4 workers for every retiree

In 40 years there will be 2.

Immigration (of young people) is the answer - not the problem