My recent experience of the UK National Health Service (long post)

clive bradbury · 10-20-09, 04:50 AM

I know that health provision is a hot topic in the USA right now, and I also know that the British NHS has been receiving a lot of criticism over there as part of that debate. I do not propose to join in any of those arguments, but it may be of interest to you to relate my recent experience with the NHS.

I suspected that I had a hernia for some time, so mentioned it when I visited my GP on an unrelated matter. He said that I had two, and referred me for surgery. The subsequent timeline was:

GP appointment: end of July . He sent the information to the NHS surgical team, and I had to wait five working days before contacting them (to allow time to process the paperwork).

I duly phoned the contact number, and was offered a choice of four hospitals:

My local NHS hospital (10 miles away)
Two alternative NHS hospitals, both about 30 miles away
The local private hospital (again roughly 10 miles away)

The reason that the NHS pays for private care as an option is that they are now required to undertake surgery within quite a strict time limitation. If their own hospitals cannot complete it within that window, they tend to pay for private surgery to get the waiting lists down.

I chose the latter (unsurprisingly) and was given an appointment date of September 3rd.

Attended, saw the surgeon, who told me I actually had three hernias (the third being an umbilical). He then asked when I wanted the surgery. Given the media criticism of long NHS waiting lists, I suggested early December, expecting him to laugh in my face at my naïve optimism. To my surprise he told me that I could have the surgery within a fortnight.

This was unsuitable, as I run my own company and had just filled my diary with appointments, so I asked for mid-October, which was duly fixed for Friday 16th.

Admitted at lunchtime, with an initial theatre time of 1430hrs. However things were running late, so it was closer to 1630. Back in my private room, including cable sports channels, by 1900hrs. Evening meal (soup & sandwiches, provided) I would have been able to go home at about 2300, but one wound (keyhole surgery) was bleeding, so I decided to stay overnight.

Went home at 1100 the following morning after breakfast. Follow up appointment with the surgeon due for six weeks’ time.

To summarise, hernia detected end of July, surgery could have been done in early September, private health care throughout, cost to me – nothing.

10-20-09, 07:19 AM

I'll chime in too about the UK health service. I was there as a measly exchange student and at the start of my exchange period I had a prolonged flu with fever. I got to see the doc and got good advice and recipe and was happy with the service. The doc had visited my home town in Finland and we had a nice chat about how nice its there in the summer. It didn't cost me a thing to see the doc.

All and all I think the Brits have a reason to be proud of their great health care.

GoldenRivet · 10-20-09, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clive bradbury

To summarise, hernia detected end of July, surgery could have been done in early September

wouldn't it be better if this statement was

"hernia detected end of July, surgery completed 5 days later."

and it only cost you a deductible or co-pay amount...

i think so.

CaptainHaplo · 10-20-09, 08:49 AM

First off - great to hear your recovering!

I do have to raise one issue, because you said something that ultimately isn't factual, though you may not have realized it.

"cost to me – nothing"

Now you said you run your own company. So you obviously pay all the applicable taxes. Those taxes would be alot lower if it were not for things such as health care for everyone in the UK. Now I won't say that every experience is bad, or that the quality is always low, because there are times things go as they are intended. But to say it costs you nothing, is simply inaccurate. You pay, in taxes and fees, not only for your own care, but for the care of others. If your ok with that, great! But for many, the reason the issue is up for discussion is because in the US, a great number of people do not feel RESPONSIBLE for those that refuse to care for themselves, or do things like break our laws, enter our country illegally, and then demand health care.

On top of that, you also have to weigh the question of EFFICIENCY. For what you have paid into the system, does the system get its money's worth? Recall you said you went to a private hospital. So the government paid more for your care than it would have normally. Also, you stated that government care has taken steps to alleviate the long waits. Doing so increase the expense of the care.

No matter how you look at it - there is a trade off. Cost vs Efficiency. This is where many Americans look to the examples that have shown private enterprise consistently outperforms public, governmental endeavors.

I am not slamming the system, just noting that its costs to you are hidden, and there is always a sacrifice. Remember, nothing worth (goods and services wise) having will ever "cost nothing".

MothBalls · 10-20-09, 08:51 AM

Glad to hear you got it sorted. Here in the States if you were uninsured, the timeline would have been as soon as someone could afford the 20k for the operation, and probably 2k in followup costs and prescriptions. If it was something major, like heart surgery, anywhere from 40-100k depending on the problem. That's why they want the public option, so people don't have to go bankrupt to save their lives.

CaptainHaplo · 10-20-09, 09:06 AM

Mothballs - good point, though not entirely true. If you need lifesaving, emergency surgery, you get it, then get a bill. Hospitals save the life first, then ask you to pay - in emergency situations. Thats required by law. They cannot refuse to take lifesaving emergency action.

However, if its non-life threatening, then yes, they will insure your ability to pay first. If your life isn't in danger, if your not going to die from not having a health procedure done, go out and get a job so you can pay for what you WANT done. Why does it become the responsibility - unasked for, of people that work hard for what they have, to take on the additional requirements and costs so that someone who doesn't want to pay should get something that they don't have to have to live?

I know this sounds harsh, but its the way I see it. It is not my responsibility to pay for you to get your leg mended after you went and broke it riding your ATV. Its not my responsibility to pay for a 17yr old on the other side of the country to have a baby. Its not my responsibility to pay for the illegal aliens who get a sniffle and decide to clog up the emergency room. Its not my responsibility to pay for the treatment of a whacked out druggy who OD'd and will just get halfway healthy just to go shoot up again. Its not my responsibility to provide STD medication to people who can't keep their pants on.

I could go on and on.

I have 2 kids, a lovely woman and myself. THAT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY! And I take care of what I am responsible for. Its about time people started taking responsibility for themselves, instead of trying to push it off on the rest of us when it comes to health care!

SteamWake · 10-20-09, 09:14 AM

Glad to hear your feeling better.

Just be glad your not this guy !

Quote:

THIS crippled plumber horribly broke his arm TEN months ago and is still waiting for surgery to repair it.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...#ixzz0UU9ZyDSK

XabbaRus · 10-20-09, 09:41 AM

It often depends where you live in the UK.

My local GP service is useless but the local hospital is great.

And yes it isn't free but it is free at the point of service, so I pay my taxes knowing that if I need surgery I won't land a bill many more times my monthly contribution in taxes and NI.

10-20-09, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Just be glad your not this guy !

So they cancelled two operations because it was unsafe to operate due to his health, he can't claim unemployment welfare as he is self-employed and he can't claim disability as its fixable.

mookiemookie · 10-20-09, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

I know this sounds harsh, but its the way I see it. It is not my responsibility to pay for you to get your leg mended after you went and broke it riding your ATV. Its not my responsibility to pay for a 17yr old on the other side of the country to have a baby. Its not my responsibility to pay for the illegal aliens who get a sniffle and decide to clog up the emergency room. Its not my responsibility to pay for the treatment of a whacked out druggy who OD'd and will just get halfway healthy just to go shoot up again. Its not my responsibility to provide STD medication to people who can't keep their pants on.

Then drop your current insurance and stop paying taxes because this is precisely what you are already doing. The concept of insurance, public or private, is based upon spreading the risk. If you don't feel someone elses illnesses and injuries are your responsibility, then why do you willingly pay insurance premiums?

Letum · 10-20-09, 10:28 AM

I have had nothing but the best service I could want from the NHS; none
of which I could afford otherwise.

It is obscene that there are still affluent countries in which life and health
are things that are bought by those that have the money and forfeit for
those who don't, due to their own mistake or, more often, innocent
misfortune.

clive bradbury · 10-20-09, 11:32 AM

Believe it or not, I am intelligent enough to be aware that I pay for NHS care via 'hidden' taxes. However, if you include US state taxes, the relative rates of taxation vis-a-vis UK/USA are roughly the same.

Unsurprisingly, the Sun story is inevitably going to criticise the NHS. Yet the man in question has been offered two operations (free) via the NHS system. It is hardly their fault that he does not look after himself and thus is unfit for surgery. What are they going to do? Risk his life on the operating table?

Purely as a matter of interest, how would an insurance company in the USA approach his case? Would a 50 year-old smoker with high blood pressure (presumably the former led to the latter) even get insurance in the first place?

Skybird · 10-20-09, 01:25 PM

Clive, your starting post is not a "long post", like you promised in the headline.

Believe me, I know!

clive bradbury · 10-20-09, 01:45 PM

Ok, Skybird, I bow to the master!

Whilst we are are the NHS/private healthcre comparision, could someone from the US answer a couple of questions.

How much is health insurance per annum? Obviously the cover will vary, but how about a ball park figure?

Also, what happens with long-term non-life threatening care? Whereas I am all for people looking after themselves, let me put an argument to you with an example.

My wife's thyroid stopped working about 15 years ago. As a result she needs constant daily doses of thyroxin for the rest of her life. Although the NHS does usually charge for prescription drugs (at a reduced rate) this does not apply in her case as the medication is required long term - she gets all her thyroxin for free.

Now, I am assuming that US health insurance would cover a situation like this, but let's look at the argument for the NHS here. Without the medication my wife would certainly be unable to work, through no negligence or blame on her part, and her life expectancy would be seriously reduced. Yet the wasteful, inefficient NHS provision of free drugs enables her to lead a normal life, work full-time as an accountant, and of course pay her taxes, thus contributing to society. This contribution is not merely financial, as she is a Girl Guide Leader, which is of course voluntary, but is again a regular contribution to our society (hopefully useful) which would be impossible without her medication.

Thus the NHS in cases like this is in fact a sensible investment. The 'cost' of any national health care system needs to be considered in far more depth than the pure financial 'burden'. I am assuming that health insurance premiums for my wife in the USA would be considerably higher, which would effectively mean that she was being punished financially through no fault of her own. A patient with diabetes would be another example. This is why I don't really follow the 'we must look after ourselves' argument.

Shearwater · 10-20-09, 02:17 PM

I've never been to the UK for so long as to incure a major illness, but a friend of mine spent a year abroad in Scotland two years ago. He tore or strained his ligaments (I can't remember), but I know that the treatment was really good and completely free of charge (and as he's no British national, he doesn't even pay indirectly for it). It seems that the system is really generous to foreigners

10-20-09, 04:50 AM	#1
clive bradbury Captain Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: stoke-on-trent, UK Posts: 492 Downloads: 105 Uploads: 0	My recent experience of the UK National Health Service (long post) I know that health provision is a hot topic in the USA right now, and I also know that the British NHS has been receiving a lot of criticism over there as part of that debate. I do not propose to join in any of those arguments, but it may be of interest to you to relate my recent experience with the NHS. I suspected that I had a hernia for some time, so mentioned it when I visited my GP on an unrelated matter. He said that I had two, and referred me for surgery. The subsequent timeline was: GP appointment: end of July . He sent the information to the NHS surgical team, and I had to wait five working days before contacting them (to allow time to process the paperwork). I duly phoned the contact number, and was offered a choice of four hospitals: My local NHS hospital (10 miles away) Two alternative NHS hospitals, both about 30 miles away The local private hospital (again roughly 10 miles away) The reason that the NHS pays for private care as an option is that they are now required to undertake surgery within quite a strict time limitation. If their own hospitals cannot complete it within that window, they tend to pay for private surgery to get the waiting lists down. I chose the latter (unsurprisingly) and was given an appointment date of September 3rd. Attended, saw the surgeon, who told me I actually had three hernias (the third being an umbilical). He then asked when I wanted the surgery. Given the media criticism of long NHS waiting lists, I suggested early December, expecting him to laugh in my face at my naïve optimism. To my surprise he told me that I could have the surgery within a fortnight. This was unsuitable, as I run my own company and had just filled my diary with appointments, so I asked for mid-October, which was duly fixed for Friday 16th. Admitted at lunchtime, with an initial theatre time of 1430hrs. However things were running late, so it was closer to 1630. Back in my private room, including cable sports channels, by 1900hrs. Evening meal (soup & sandwiches, provided) I would have been able to go home at about 2300, but one wound (keyhole surgery) was bleeding, so I decided to stay overnight. Went home at 1100 the following morning after breakfast. Follow up appointment with the surgeon due for six weeks’ time. To summarise, hernia detected end of July, surgery could have been done in early September, private health care throughout, cost to me – nothing.

10-20-09, 08:49 AM	#4
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	First off - great to hear your recovering! I do have to raise one issue, because you said something that ultimately isn't factual, though you may not have realized it. "cost to me – nothing" Now you said you run your own company. So you obviously pay all the applicable taxes. Those taxes would be alot lower if it were not for things such as health care for everyone in the UK. Now I won't say that every experience is bad, or that the quality is always low, because there are times things go as they are intended. But to say it costs you nothing, is simply inaccurate. You pay, in taxes and fees, not only for your own care, but for the care of others. If your ok with that, great! But for many, the reason the issue is up for discussion is because in the US, a great number of people do not feel RESPONSIBLE for those that refuse to care for themselves, or do things like break our laws, enter our country illegally, and then demand health care. On top of that, you also have to weigh the question of EFFICIENCY. For what you have paid into the system, does the system get its money's worth? Recall you said you went to a private hospital. So the government paid more for your care than it would have normally. Also, you stated that government care has taken steps to alleviate the long waits. Doing so increase the expense of the care. No matter how you look at it - there is a trade off. Cost vs Efficiency. This is where many Americans look to the examples that have shown private enterprise consistently outperforms public, governmental endeavors. I am not slamming the system, just noting that its costs to you are hidden, and there is always a sacrifice. Remember, nothing worth (goods and services wise) having will ever "cost nothing". __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

10-20-09, 09:06 AM	#6
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	Mothballs - good point, though not entirely true. If you need lifesaving, emergency surgery, you get it, then get a bill. Hospitals save the life first, then ask you to pay - in emergency situations. Thats required by law. They cannot refuse to take lifesaving emergency action. However, if its non-life threatening, then yes, they will insure your ability to pay first. If your life isn't in danger, if your not going to die from not having a health procedure done, go out and get a job so you can pay for what you WANT done. Why does it become the responsibility - unasked for, of people that work hard for what they have, to take on the additional requirements and costs so that someone who doesn't want to pay should get something that they don't have to have to live? I know this sounds harsh, but its the way I see it. It is not my responsibility to pay for you to get your leg mended after you went and broke it riding your ATV. Its not my responsibility to pay for a 17yr old on the other side of the country to have a baby. Its not my responsibility to pay for the illegal aliens who get a sniffle and decide to clog up the emergency room. Its not my responsibility to pay for the treatment of a whacked out druggy who OD'd and will just get halfway healthy just to go shoot up again. Its not my responsibility to provide STD medication to people who can't keep their pants on. I could go on and on. I have 2 kids, a lovely woman and myself. THAT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY! And I take care of what I am responsible for. Its about time people started taking responsibility for themselves, instead of trying to push it off on the rest of us when it comes to health care! __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

10-20-09, 09:41 AM	#8
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	It often depends where you live in the UK. My local GP service is useless but the local hospital is great. And yes it isn't free but it is free at the point of service, so I pay my taxes knowing that if I need surgery I won't land a bill many more times my monthly contribution in taxes and NI. __________________

10-20-09, 10:28 AM	#11
Letum Navy Seal Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: York - UK Posts: 6,079 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	I have had nothing but the best service I could want from the NHS; none of which I could afford otherwise. It is obscene that there are still affluent countries in which life and health are things that are bought by those that have the money and forfeit for those who don't, due to their own mistake or, more often, innocent misfortune. __________________

10-20-09, 07:19 AM	#2
OneToughHerring Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	I'll chime in too about the UK health service. I was there as a measly exchange student and at the start of my exchange period I had a prolonged flu with fever. I got to see the doc and got good advice and recipe and was happy with the service. The doc had visited my home town in Finland and we had a nice chat about how nice its there in the summer. It didn't cost me a thing to see the doc. All and all I think the Brits have a reason to be proud of their great health care.

10-20-09, 08:51 AM	#5
MothBalls Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1,012 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	Glad to hear you got it sorted. Here in the States if you were uninsured, the timeline would have been as soon as someone could afford the 20k for the operation, and probably 2k in followup costs and prescriptions. If it was something major, like heart surgery, anywhere from 40-100k depending on the problem. That's why they want the public option, so people don't have to go bankrupt to save their lives.

10-20-09, 11:32 AM	#12
clive bradbury Captain Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: stoke-on-trent, UK Posts: 492 Downloads: 105 Uploads: 0	Believe it or not, I am intelligent enough to be aware that I pay for NHS care via 'hidden' taxes. However, if you include US state taxes, the relative rates of taxation vis-a-vis UK/USA are roughly the same. Unsurprisingly, the Sun story is inevitably going to criticise the NHS. Yet the man in question has been offered two operations (free) via the NHS system. It is hardly their fault that he does not look after himself and thus is unfit for surgery. What are they going to do? Risk his life on the operating table? Purely as a matter of interest, how would an insurance company in the USA approach his case? Would a 50 year-old smoker with high blood pressure (presumably the former led to the latter) even get insurance in the first place? Last edited by clive bradbury; 10-20-09 at 02:06 PM.

10-20-09, 01:25 PM	#13
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Clive, your starting post is not a "long post", like you promised in the headline. Believe me, I know! __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

10-20-09, 01:45 PM	#14
clive bradbury Captain Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: stoke-on-trent, UK Posts: 492 Downloads: 105 Uploads: 0	Ok, Skybird, I bow to the master! Whilst we are are the NHS/private healthcre comparision, could someone from the US answer a couple of questions. How much is health insurance per annum? Obviously the cover will vary, but how about a ball park figure? Also, what happens with long-term non-life threatening care? Whereas I am all for people looking after themselves, let me put an argument to you with an example. My wife's thyroid stopped working about 15 years ago. As a result she needs constant daily doses of thyroxin for the rest of her life. Although the NHS does usually charge for prescription drugs (at a reduced rate) this does not apply in her case as the medication is required long term - she gets all her thyroxin for free. Now, I am assuming that US health insurance would cover a situation like this, but let's look at the argument for the NHS here. Without the medication my wife would certainly be unable to work, through no negligence or blame on her part, and her life expectancy would be seriously reduced. Yet the wasteful, inefficient NHS provision of free drugs enables her to lead a normal life, work full-time as an accountant, and of course pay her taxes, thus contributing to society. This contribution is not merely financial, as she is a Girl Guide Leader, which is of course voluntary, but is again a regular contribution to our society (hopefully useful) which would be impossible without her medication. Thus the NHS in cases like this is in fact a sensible investment. The 'cost' of any national health care system needs to be considered in far more depth than the pure financial 'burden'. I am assuming that health insurance premiums for my wife in the USA would be considerably higher, which would effectively mean that she was being punished financially through no fault of her own. A patient with diabetes would be another example. This is why I don't really follow the 'we must look after ourselves' argument. Last edited by clive bradbury; 10-20-09 at 02:22 PM.

10-20-09, 02:17 PM	#15
Shearwater Captain Join Date: May 2009 Location: SUBSIM Radio Room (kinda obvious, isn't it) Posts: 542 Downloads: 45 Uploads: 0	I've never been to the UK for so long as to incure a major illness, but a friend of mine spent a year abroad in Scotland two years ago. He tore or strained his ligaments (I can't remember), but I know that the treatment was really good and completely free of charge (and as he's no British national, he doesn't even pay indirectly for it). It seems that the system is really generous to foreigners