Anyone ever had need to sue a hospital?

Apart from meaning that Mike can stop working full time and care for
his wife if the need arises.

I'm afraid that merely giving the hospital a bollocking isn't going to
help the Barnard family if the situation worsens and giving Mike the
freedom to care for them without worrying about losing his home has to
be of primary importance.

The NHS is a shambles and the government either isn't interested in
bringing it back to being something the rest of the World are envious
of or it doesn't give a flying ****.

 

Good heavens I am not suggesting anything against that. I was thinking
that were it me I wouldn't know where to start. Of course Mike should
have the kind of support that's needed for his wife.

Yes I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

I wouldn't call it a shambles. It's too easy to make a generalisation on
such a huge organisation. It's got problems at every level and in that
it's not a unique organisation either. It's also got some very good
people, kit and procedures. Getting them all to a good standard is the
struggle.

 

It's a fucking shambles when you have to wait three months to get an
appointment to see a consultant. I know they have to prioritise
treatment and I'm a firm believer in the idea that kids should always
come first closely followed by pensioners (they'll be dead soon enough
so try and give them something resembling health care) but what's the
rest of the queue made up of?

I certainly don't want to see a two tier system come in where those
that pay into the coffers get priority but I would like to see non UK
nationals having to pay towards treatment until they've worked here
for at least two years.

 

Then, if my mum's hip operation is anything to go by, about 3 further
visits, each a month apart whilst they try different combinations of
anti-inflamitories and steroids, that actually do nothing for the
underlying arthritis, but do allow them to string things out further.

 

My old man came out of hospital earlier this year, after having a new
knee fitted, with one leg just under two inches shorter than the other.

--
Veggie Dave
http://www.iq18films.co.uk

"To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim
that Jesus was not born of a virgin." Cardinal Bellarmine

 

It makes you wonder what they see as being their priority.

 

They've met their target, seen the patient within whatever guideline
is imposed.

 

That's really just playing the blame game. And would make **** all
difference in the whole scheme of things.

But you're right - a 2-tier system isn't acceptable. The answer? Get
rid of the NHS and move the whole thing to indurance-based medicine,
while ensuring that non-earners are provided for out of a social fund,
in that their insurance would be fully or partially state-funded.

 

You've just described the NHS at its inception. Well done.

 

As I get older I hate myself for sounding more and more like a hippy,
but I'm strongly of the opinion making profit out of illness isn't the
right thing for society as a whole.

An insurance based system would be just fine if all the parts of the
system were run on a not for profit basis, but that's not the case, so
the end result of an insurance based system will be more corporate
profiteering, and less money going directly into looking after people.
I can't see how that is in any way better.

 

I don't really know of another way and if, as Mike or someone else
mentioned, if he needs to pack in work to take care of the family, who's
going to finance that? Long term care is both financially crippling and
*fucking* hard work for which you receive no payment and it could easily
reach the point where the whole family could lose their home. All this
blather about not suing the NHS because they're "the good guys" is bollocks,
coz when push comes to shove, no-one will do anything *real* to help when
the shit hits the fan, so financial compensation is a necessity.

You think it needs an expert to work out that errant wires left inside
bodies are a good thing? I'm quite flad you're not a doctor if so.

Yes, I know they CAN, but *have* they? I saw nothng on that site confirming
that.

And again "can"... have they?


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

 

And without suing the NHS, where's he going to get it?

Preston and Chorley both do an utterly fantastic job.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

 

I believe that happens with a lot of joint affected problems. After having
had tennis elbow in both elbows and frozen should in one shoulder, all of
which took over 18 months to get any *real* treatment for (like you say, the
injections aren't a long term answer), when my 2nd shoulder started
displaying the same symptoms, I went about things in a slightly different
way.

I went to see my GP who said he'd arrange an appointment with a "specialist"
ad I said "I'm not going through another 18 months of being fucked up by
every pillar and post, so stick some Cortisone in before you do anything
else and I'd be more than happy to go home and let it do its thing". He
didn't like that idea and began giving me reasons why he shouldn't (Your
shoulder has to be clean, so I'll only do it following a good was (cheeky
****, so I pressed on...

"That shoulder has just got out of the bath, but if you don't give me a
Cortisone shot today that's fine, I'll go back home and shove 10ml of
Deconate (Nandralone) in my shoulder today and another 10ml tomorrow and see
how that goes".

"You can't get that stuff, it's prescription only" he said, but when I said
"Tell that to the top shelf of my fridge" he realised I wasn't joking. I had
an appointment for my shoulder to be operated on within a month and I got
the Cortisone shot too. As one wag once said "He who shouts loudest and
longest gets the results".

The operation was a raging success too, like all the previous ones. The
annoying thing is, the operations take roughly half an hour and it's
basically "Job done...Next please".


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

 

Isn't Obama trying to get rid of insurance based health care and move to a
system close to ours? It's not going down well over there.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

 

<ding!>
A barrister of my acquaintance told me, as an example, that hospital
insurance companies will not countenance an apology from any individual
or department under any circumstances, as they're concerned that a) it
will be taken as an admission of liability and the aggrieved party may
change their mind from being happy with an apology to going full-on into
sue their arses mode, and b) let the fuckers take us to court, it's
cheaper in the long run.

 

A century or so of aspirin manufacturers would argue against that.

 

Profit? Who's talking about profit? Would you suggest that doctors,
nurses and other health workers should only be paid minimum salary? Or
that hospitals and research institutes should only be doled out
research funds authorised out of the public purse?

Can you perhaps explain why you would think this? I can't see any
reason to do so.

So not like the NHS at all, then?

It's about equal provision for all. The only difference netween
provisions from th highest to the lowest cost insurance (in CH) is
greater choice of doctors and stuff like single rooms and better food
in hospitals.

 

No, I'd not suggest that, at the coal face people will be paid the
going rate - salary bands, etc are common across the NHS and I'd not
see that changing.. What I can't see is how a medical insurance
company would be run in any other way but to make a profit - that's
how insurance works.

The 2 medical insurance companies I can think of are Axa PPP and Bupa
- both are run at a profit, and take more money out of the system than
could be directly spent on patients. A system run not for profit
would be able to treat more patients with that cash.

The greatest waste of cash in the NHS IMHO is the needless statistic
chasing. Again I'd like to see the money that goes into that spent
directly on patient care.

And this costs the same or less than the NHS, does it?

 

Yes. I did the sums a while back, let's see if I can find it...

<googles>
<fails>

Well anyway, I did some sums based on extrapolating our premiums to
the whole Swiss[1] population and comparing it with the total NHS
budget.

Per capita, it was about the same.

[1] Which is the system on which I'm basing these observations.

 

Ahh, in that case it may have merit. My understanding of how an
insurance based system works is the american one, which I see as a
whole lot worse than ours.