NHS fee to double

You will pay a lot more than £5 a visit in other countries.  Try 60E a GP visit each time you or your childen age 5 plus went to see a GP. 100E for each A&E visit. No cheap prescriptions, but capped at about 140E a months. plus a monthly fee to use the health service and taxes to pay. That's Ireland, but I doubt there are many countries where there is no fee to see the GP, or a medical to pass to get a visa. Why do you think the UK's NHS is so popular with foreign nationals and with Brits returning for retirement? 

Some wealthly EEA countries require their elderly to have private insurance too if they want some treatments, as well as pay the monthly insurance to the national scheme.

Have you missed what has just been going on in Germany and their healthcare system?

I have missed it.  What's been happening?

Sirius, do you think a copay is a good idea?  I do think it's a good idea, but I am also aware that I have the luxury of knowing I can pay it...  I realize this is not something people have the ability to pay for across the board.

I was out walking last summer......went through a field where a young lady (25?) and her boyfriend were just sitting and talking(it was a nice day.....shocking). As I walk past she makes a phone call....she had a Dr appt within the next 30 minutes but she told them that something came up and she couldn't make it. She just didn't feel like going right then.....another wasted appointment. I started wondering how many people did the same thing.....or didn't call at all.

It seems to be about 13 million doctor appointments and 6 million practice nurse appointments each year that are missed.
https://www.nhs.uk/Services/UserControls/UploadHandlers/MediaServerHandler.ashx?id=10646&t=636552292701952716

Last year I turned up late afternoon for an echocardiogram and was there almost 30 mins early. No sooner had I settled down with a podcast before I was called in. They took me early because of missed appointments that day.

I have missed it.  What's been happening?

I have edited my post and put what has happened. 

Sirius, do you think a copay is a good idea?  I do think it's a good idea, but I am also aware that I have the luxury of knowing I can pay it...  I realize this is not something people have the ability to pay for across the board.

Did you know that those who could work but don't, get about £90 a week cash, per child, in benefits, plus their housing benefit? The same for those too sick to work, plus extra benefit money for themselves.

Some able bodied not working, could get over 100k a year in welfare payments if they had enough children and could live in an area they could never afford to if they worked. This is why the benefit cap was brought in in 2010. To avoid the benefits cap, they only needed to work 24 hours a week, between both parents.

Even those able bodied who don't bother to work enough hours to keep their family, get benefits for their children so that the child does not miss out. But that money is paid to the parents, with no check to see that the child got that money spent on them!

They can afford to pay to see a GP, but they might not want to.



Last time Labour were in government, they talked about the need to do what other countries do and charge for each GP visit, so that that used who used the NHS more, paid for it. The figure mentioned was about £30 a visit. GPs wanted it too to stop the time wasters who turn up when they don't need to see a GP and should have gone to a chemist. Most Brits also seemed to think it was a good idea as all the other countries already do this.

The previous government talked about bringing in a fee to use A&E and ambulances if they are not allowed to use the NHS bill free, to stop the abuse of those who don't bother to buy private insurance when they are not allowed to use the NHS bill free. 50% added to their bill if they didn't have insurance to pay.

Less talking and more action to bring these in. The NHS just become a target otherwise.

I assume the 90 pounds a week per child (which strikes me as generous) continues once the child is school age? Before that point, unless there is free daycare, a stay-at-home Mom pretty much can't afford to work. (And raising kids is definitely "work", just not out-of-the-home.) However, once the kiddies are in school or daycare, I would hope that if someone was physically able to work, but unable to find a placement, there would be some sort of mandatory public service required for the 90 pounds per week?  With the councils being so stretched for funds, it seems like there's a labor pool available that's not being tapped. If nothing else, they could provide daycare so some other person would be free to seek employment?

There was a time, when the Daughter was young, that we had to go on welfare. I had lost my job in a recession while pregnant, had the baby, & was ill. The money I had saved for years ran out. The ex didn't like having constraints on his lifestyle. Buh bye. I was able to find several medium-paying jobs, but couldn't take any of them - they didn't have medical insurance for the baby while not paying enough to purchase private insurance. (She was sick a lot, so going without Medicaid wasn't feasible.)  And, really, even if they'd had insurance, daycare was non-existent for babies under the age of 18 months. We got $509 a month in cash and $75 in foodstamps.  I stood in line at the WIC office every month for handouts of beans, government cheese, milk, and a can of peanut butter. (I kept the last can of peanut butter I received on my shelf until we packed to move here as a reminder to not take good times for granted.) The wait for subsidized housing was well over 3 years. I paid for everything out of that $509, including $9 to cash the check. Rent on the private market (with a series of skeevy landlords), diapers, formula, laundromat, loo roll, food, medicine for the baby that Medicaid didn't cover, anything we needed. I used to turn the pilot light off on the wall furnace during the daytime, thinking it would save a few pennies. I spent a ~lot~ of sleepless nights worrying about being tossed out into the street with the baby. Thankfully, all that is light years behind us and I am still so grateful to have had that $509 a month when we needed it.

I've only said all this, at the risk of coming across as a drama queen, so you will know that I am not unsympathetic to people who have to rely on government support.Been there, done that.  Not everyone has family they can fall back on during hard times. To have secure housing, and then living expenses that actually were enough to provide all of the basics, wow - that would have been amazing.  I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the social services here. People seem to expect a lot more than I ever did, as a matter of course. On the one hand, the benefits do seem extremely generous, but on the other hand it seems like once you get into all that you can never get back out and on your own? (More-so than in the US?)

it seems like once you get into all that you can never get back out and on your own? (More-so than in the US?)

Call me cynical, but that's how the government wants it. Those in power want and need a class of people wholly dependent upon them - it gives those in power MORE power and a solid block of voters come election time. Then, they have their built-in boogeyman (the guy who comes along and suggests a hand up rather than a hand out) who wants to come and "take away their money". These elites are all too happy to take away from Peter and give it to Paul because what do they care, they make their salary and live high on the hog as a result.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

I have edited my post and put what has happened. 
Last time Labour were in government, they talked about the need to do what other countries do and charge for each GP visit, so that that used who used the NHS more, paid for it. The figure mentioned was about £30 a visit. GPs wanted it too to stop the time wasters who turn up when they don't need to see a GP and should have gone to a chemist. Most Brits also seemed to think it was a good idea as all the other countries already do this.

My only concern with the charges is that once they start doing it (whether it be £5 or £30), that kind of opens the door to them quickly increasing those fees in the future. Then it becomes another major source of income.

Not everyone has family they can fall back on during hard times. To have secure housing, and then living expenses that actually were enough to provide all of the basics, wow - that would have been amazing.  I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the social services here. People seem to expect a lot more than I ever did, as a matter of course. On the one hand, the benefits do seem extremely generous, but on the other hand it seems like once you get into all that you can never get back out and on your own? (More-so than in the US?)

I'm with you Nan.  I haven't wrapped my head around what's offered here but (from what the media has portrayed), it does seem generous. 

Sirius, am I right in thinking that if you qualify at some point for a council house - that you have the right to that house for life?  Even if you are a brilliant entrepreneur who goes on to make millions of pounds a year, you can keep that council house.  Is that correct?

I also wasn't impressed when someone I know had their council home offered to them on "Right to Buy" and they planned to purchase the home and resell it for a large profit in a couple of years (I think there was a restriction on selling from time of purchase to sale).  They could afford to obtain a mortgage WITHOUT the right to buy, but wanted to make the free money possible on the scheme.  That bothered me.  I wish she would have offered the house back to have it available to someone who now needs it, as she no longer needed council housing.

My only concern with the charges is that once they start doing it (whether it be £5 or £30), that kind of opens the door to them quickly increasing those fees in the future. Then it becomes another major source of income.

I feel like a fee for missed appointments would be fair (barring a notice period and specific circumstances like snowstorm). But I agree its a slippery slope on copays.

I've been trying to wrap my head around the benefits here as well, and it seems like they are glorified by some but the people I know who are actually relying on them are barely scraping by and living in cost controlled flats with serious problems and no way out. I think it may be due to the cost of living in most places? I'm honestly not sure.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

I have mixed feelings about benefits systems both here and in the USA.  I have 2 sisters who went through some really tough times and the benefits system came through with the assistance they needed to get back on their feet. They both had serious illnesses that knocked them out of the workforce for a few years but as soon as they were able they started work again, and I definitely do not want to be dependent of the benefits system, EVER.

In the USA I have been a member of an early retirement site for many years and there are a lot of threads giving advice on how to game the tax system to legally minimize taxes and/or get benefits. There are quite a few early retirees on that site with multi-million $ portfolios who get their healthcare heavily subsidized through the ACA (aka Obamacare) by carefully managing their taxable income (Modified Adjustable Gross Income).  These same folks will also rant about others on benefits.

Whether you look at the bottom, middle or top of the wealth range you will find a significant percentage of folks who will grab as much as they can from the government from either benefits or tax avoidance and evasion.

Whether you look at the bottom, middle or top of the wealth range you will find a significant percentage of folks who will grab as much as they can from the government from either benefits or tax avoidance and evasion.

Isn't that the truth!

Yeah, I guess you are right.

I wouldn't begin to try to judge anyone. I did that once - when I was pregnant my ex had a friend and his new wife come to stay with us for a few days. The woman was from a large family, and the father had passed away several years before. I, rather tactlessly, mentioned that I could  not imagine how her mother made ends meet. She replied that they were on welfare, and I had the ill manners to not just drop the subject and was not very gracious about it. When they left I am sorry to say I thought the worse of the woman's mother.

Talk about karmic paybacks! Yoiks, that one cost me!   

I assume the 90 pounds a week per child (which strikes me as generous) continues once the child is school age?

They can go up to the "childs" 20th birthday. The money is given to their parent/s to spend, for every child they claim for.

Are they penalized if they save any of it? I know in the US if you are on assistance and you try to save any leftover money back (or at least, this is how it used to be) they will cut your assistance as you obviously don't need that much.

Oh. And depressingly, I was watching some US news on Roku. It's happened again.

https://www.10news.com/news/man-found-dead-near-scripps-mercy-hospital-in-hillcrest

Sirius, am I right in thinking that if you qualify at some point for a council house - that you have the right to that house for life?  Even if you are a brilliant entrepreneur who goes on to make millions of pounds a year, you can keep that council house.  Is that correct?

The union leader Bob Crow was one of the famous cases, he earned 145k but refused to give his low rent council house up. There will be lots on the web on this if you want a read. Have a look for MPs buying council houses too

In Italy, they have to declare their earning every year and are removed from their house when they earn a certain amount to allow another family to live there. The UK will never get to this unless the voting system changes to each vote in an election.