A tale of 2 sickbeds: Healthcare in UK vs. US

Interesting article I saw on MSNBC today that I thought people might find interesting.  I think it is a good wrap up of some of the differences in the systems.  One person's experiences, of course.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26794291/

Thanks for that article Geeta. 
There is a lot of good and bad in both systems.  Its hard for me to argue for the NHS when I'm still in pain, but at least right now its not discriminating against the haves and have nots!  (FYIW, I've been on both the haves and have nots in the US- and the haves is much better!!!)

Here is an interesting article relating to the paying of extra drugs:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4806144.ece

It bothers me when people compare treatment received under the NHS with treatment received under a private insurer in the US. 

You should compare treatment under a private US health plan with treatment under a private UK health plan.

You should compare NHS treatment with the treatment that a Medicaid patient would receive in the US.

Well I wouldn't wish medicaid medical treatment on anybody! However, MassHealth (low income insurance in Massachusetts) offers pretty good treatment options.  I know several folks on MassHealth and its working out great for them.
But at least here you don't have to prove your life away and fill a gazillion forms out and wait and wait and wait forever to be qualified for it and then at the end of the day not be qualified for medicaid and then be totally out of luck for any health care at all.   I tell you what, the black hole of not being able to get state/national assistance but having no health insurance at all is not a nice place to be in.  At least NHS is available to everyone, regardless of if you're a have or have not. 

As I have shared before...I am much happier with NHS than the HMO I had in the US. If that HMO had done an ultra-sound when I was having my gall stone attacks instead of just prescribing me powerful pain-killers then I could have had a simple laproscopic procedure and been fine in days. Instead NHS had to do major surgery. So for my two-cents...even profit driven private healthcare in the US is lacking.

Of course I will say that noone is chronically ill in our family...either in the US or UK.

It bothers me when people compare treatment received under the NHS with treatment received under a private insurer in the US. 

You should compare treatment under a private US health plan with treatment under a private UK health plan.

You should compare NHS treatment with the treatment that a Medicaid patient would receive in the US.

I don't agree.  There are a lot more people in the UK who use the NHS that likely would have private insurance in the US.  I don't think it's right to compare the NHS to Medicaid/Medicare treatment as one is really meant to only care for people with low/no income, and the other is meant to care for everyone.

I don't agree.  There are a lot more people in the UK who use the NHS that likely would have private insurance in the US.  I don't think it's right to compare the NHS to Medicaid/Medicare treatment as one is really meant to only care for people with low/no income, and the other is meant to care for everyone.

But in both countries you have the choice to purchase insurance privately if you aren't happy with the government system.

But in both countries you have the choice to purchase insurance privately if you aren't happy with the government system.

But in the US you are not expected to be on the government system.  In other words, it would collapse if the entire population was meant to be on it.  On the other hand, in the UK, you are meant to be on it.  Private insurance is much more a given with most jobs in the US, whereas in the UK it's not.  You're expected to be on the NHS.

Either way you pay for private insurance in the US, whether it is out of your own pocket or as a salary deduction (if your employer didn't feel obligated to insure you, they could pay you a higher salary.)

I don't think it's fair to compare service that you pay for, sometimes at exhorbitant rates, for service that you get free at point of purchase.

Geeta, your points are valid as well.

By the way, I have had family members receive terrible health care in the US despite paying a lot for it.

Either way you pay for private insurance in the US, whether it is out of your own pocket or as a salary deduction (if your employer didn't feel obligated to insure you, they could pay you a higher salary.)

Yeah, but you pay for the NHS as well, through your salary deductions. 

I don't think it's fair to compare service that you pay for, sometimes at exhorbitant rates, for service that you get free at point of purchase.

I was recently treated in the US at point of purchase and I paid nothing, despite not having any proof of insurance.  I was not turned away or told I couldn't be treated - my details were taken and I was taken care of.  Clearly a bill will come at some point, but it was definitely free at point of purchase.

I look at it from my point of view, which is that if I were in the US I would have decent healthcare by way of my insurance.  In the UK I have the NHS.  I also have private insurance, but I can't use it unless I have already exhausted my NHS services.  So that's how the two are comparable for me.

If you want to compare apples-to-apples the surely you need to compare government provided health care to government provided health care and private-to-private in both countries?

Yeah, but you pay for the NHS as well, through your salary deductions. 

I was recently treated in the US at point of purchase and I paid nothing, despite not having any proof of insurance.  I was not turned away or told I couldn't be treated - my details were taken and I was taken care of.  Clearly a bill will come at some point, but it was definitely free at point of purchase.

I look at it from my point of view, which is that if I were in the US I would have decent healthcare by way of my insurance.  In the UK I have the NHS.  I also have private insurance, but I can't use it unless I have already exhausted my NHS services.  So that's how the two are comparable for me.

The OECD provide a spreadsheet that lists healthcare expenditure by country and what % of that is spent by the government.  Some people might be surprise how much the American tax payer spends on 'socialized' healthcare already for very little benefit.

http://www.oecd.org/document/16/0,3343,en_2649_33929_2085200_1_1_1_1,00.html

In the UK your taxes pay for a (possibly flawed) comprehensive healthcare system, in the US more of your taxes are spent to provide a patchwork of limited services to small sectors of society.

In both countries the option exist to purchase private healthcare.  In the UK most people don't see the need.  In the US most people have little choice.

If you want to compare apples-to-apples the surely you need to compare government provided health care to government provided health care and private-to-private in both countries?

As I said above, I'm comparing it purely from my point of view.  I likely won't need to use Medicare/Medicaid in the US, but I really have no option in the UK but to use the NHS.  In the US, I will use private insurance but in the UK I likely won't.  So I compare it by looking at what my experience will be.

In both countries the option exist to purchase private healthcare.  In the UK most people don't see the need.  In the US most people have little choice.

Agree for the most part.

as a recent repat to the US, i can report that we pay far less here in health insurance premiums than we did in the UK for NHS plus private, using the 9% figure quoted in the article.  i could never consider the NHS even remotely free when i considered the amount we contributed to the UK system every month.  i realize that that is our personal experience, and that our UK payments were funding others who didn't earn as much, but both payments are realistically what we pay for healthcare.  and, yes, we have had better care in the US, but have only had basic maintenance, and are comparing a NY suburb to London NHS which is obviously apples to oranges.  my husband does have a chronic skin condition which requires some very expensive drugs, even with insurance, and we were shocked when we saw the price the first time.  the drugs do work miracles, though, and weren't  available in the UK due to high cost.  

as a recent repat to the US, i can report that we pay far less here in health insurance premiums than we did in the UK for NHS plus private, using the 9% figure quoted in the article.  

Ignoring the fact that the 9% figure in the article is unsourced; you're comparing apples and oranges.  Why compare taxation + private in the UK to just private in the US?  That only makes sense if none of the tax you pay in the US goes towards providing healthcare; the US govt. spends more pre capita on healthcare than the UK govt. does.

I don't think you really can compare UK private insurance to US. In the UK, for the most part, private insurance only kicks in after you've seen an NHS doctor and for many conditions, you still end up using NHS facilities and seeing NHS doctors. To some degree, you are just paying for the privilege of queue jumping with UK private insurance.