Turn on thread page Beta

Should the NHS be public or private? Why? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    As above.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I support the continued existence of the NHS for the most part as a publicly funded body.

    With that being said though i do think that we must deal with the pressures put upon it by population growth, a rising birth rate and an increasing number of pensioners. To this end my proposal would be that those in full time work (30+ hours per week, 16-66) and of working age would have their outpatient services (specialist assistance for an ankle injury for example) provided by private medical insurance made up of a 1% contribution from the state, the employee and the employer. This would have the primary effect of removing the strain and less important services from the NHS and also vastly reduce waiting lists for the effected people (my friend needed to see a knee specialist and was given an NHS appointment for 3 years later). Under this system the unemployed, low paid (those earning below the tax threshold), children, disabled and pensioners would still have such services provided by the NHS. The money saved from those of working age not clogging up the system however could in part be used to cut taxation, but also invested elsewhere in more important NHS services such as cancer treatment.


    (Original post by slothgal)
    As above.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I am against private contractors in the NHS( doesnt really save money, short term thinking and soften public
    up for full privatisation). Against selling NHS records to the private sector.

    I believe people who voluntarily get drunk and need medical assistance should pay a surcharge.

    I believe breast enlargements,IVF and other non essential medical procedures should not he available on the NHS.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I am against the privatization of the NHS as it has been funded by the tax payer from the day it started which means the government will be effectively stealing from the tax payer, like they stole away Royal Mail.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I'd rather have the money back that was taken from me in taxes to fund the NHS and then go and buy my own private health insurance. With the money left over I'd also buy a massive TV.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rich2606)
    I'd rather have the money back that was taken from me in taxes to fund the NHS and then go and buy my own private health insurance. With the money left over I'd also buy a massive TV.
    Good luck with that. Medical insurance companies in the US have enormous legal teams and a particular knack for slipping out of their commitments to fork out for claims. In particular pre-existing conditions, which, ultimately, we all have.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Good luck with that. Medical insurance companies in the US have enormous legal teams and a particular knack for slipping out of their commitments to fork out for claims. In particular pre-existing conditions, which, ultimately, we all have.
    Do you have things we can read which talk about this?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    A mixture of both.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The state should pay for healthcare, the private sector should provide it. There should be free at point of use healthcare for all, but the government shouldn't be running the services.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Good luck with that. Medical insurance companies in the US have enormous legal teams and a particular knack for slipping out of their commitments to fork out for claims. In particular pre-existing conditions, which, ultimately, we all have.
    I wouldn't lie on my application about pre-existing conditions then, and the British private healthcare providers like BUPA don't seem to have the same accusations leveled at them.

    The problem with the NHS is that as it's free at the point of use people over-use it. People clog up the system with the sniffles and minor cuts and bruises, meaning that you have to know you're going to be ill 2 weeks in advance in order to see your GP that day, or face a 4+hour wait in A&E, and if you need an operation you have to go on waiting lists that are several months long. Nuts to that, if I'm ill I want to be seen immediately. I resent so much of my income being taken away to fund such a lousy service, where if I didn't have to pay for it I could afford a MUCH better service.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    How can the NHS work being privately-funded?

    To make it ad supported?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    This would have the primary effect of removing the strain and less important services from the NHS and also vastly reduce waiting lists for the effected people (my friend needed to see a knee specialist and was given an NHS appointment for 3 years later).
    One of the problems with this argument is making a system private, in healthcare where there is a long training period for specialist health professionals, does not do much on the supply side.

    The doctors delivering private services are the same doctors that are delivering NHS services and lots of them do both.

    So just because you have X% of the population covered by the private system does not necessarily "free up those beds" in terms of supply for those relying on the NHS. It's just a different funding body.

    As one of the big problems with private healthcare is overtreatment/unnecessary treatment (when an insurer pays, the health provider has an incentive to overprovide which is one reason insurance premiums will always end up being higher than they would in a well functioning market), this just clogs up the system more.

    In general with most things I support privatisation and I would try to bring in these mixed models of funding but in healthcare there are a lot of market failures that don't go away so private models are rife with problems.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chrisawhitmore)
    The state should pay for healthcare, the private sector should provide it. There should be free at point of use healthcare for all, but the government shouldn't be running the services.
    Why?


    That doesn't even make any sense. The whole point of the private sector is that it is their to make profit. If ti is getting all of its money form the government then it wont be private.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rich2606)
    face a 4+hour wait in A&E,
    The horror.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm in favour of not just privatisation of the NHS as I'm never usually ill or seriously injured (and even if I was sick all the time that's still no excuse to make people pay for me), I'm in favour of changing the law to let me buy my own medicine without having to get a prescription first! if I know what specific medicine I need, why do I need to get permission? what am I, a child? sheesh, if I'm over 18 and I'm allowed alcohol then let me buy my own medicines, I'm not going to kill myself, I know what I'm doing, and even if I don't, it's my choice an it's my life (note: I'm talking about the medicine you need prescriptions to obtain, of course)
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by captain.sensible)
    I'm in favour of changing the law to let me buy my own medicine without having to get a prescription first! if I know what specific medicine I need, why do I need to get permission? what am I, a child?
    There is a very good reason why prescriptions are needed. The idea is that access to these drugs is resctricted.

    As for the thread topic - I think that it is better the NHS is publicly financed. We get a fairly good deal as things are.

    As for how it is run - I would probably side towards being state run rather than farmed out to private companies. I have private medical insurance which is fairly good - it does not exclude pre existing medical conditions, no outpatient limit etc. My experience of using this cover is, thanfully, limited - however on the occasion I did, I had no complaints.

    However I think that the UK has a culture, driven by the existence of a largely State run NHS, which drives up the standards of private medical insurance providers for those who decide to use them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by InnerTemple)
    There is a very good reason why prescriptions are needed. The idea is that access to these drugs is resctricted.
    yeah, and I was arguing that it shouldn't be restricted - if I have the money and there is supply, I should have the right, and so should the vendors, to exchange money for medicine on demand. I don't want to pay taxes or non-tax money to pay a doctor to tell me what I probably already know what kind of medicine and what kind of amount I'm going to need, and if I don't, at least allow me to risk it provided I'm not harming anybody from it. if I'm allowed to smoke and take alcohol, which can either kill you in one night (alcohol poisoning) or over time (lung cancer) and make you addicted and induce you waste copious amounts of money, then why am I not allowed to buy medicine without a prescription if I don't need a prescription for alcohol and cigarettes? at least medicine isn't going to damage me in the same way alcohol/cigarettes will in my life, as really, it doesn't make too much difference either way so long as I'm a rational adult responsible for my own choices, and the government shouln't be barring me from making my own choices whether they're intelligent or not - if I'm harming nobody then I'm not transgression anybody's rights
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I think there should be more NHS work contracted out to the private sector, yes. Would I abolish it? Maybe, if something better could be formulated. However I do believe there will always have to be some level of state involvement in healthcare.

    In terms of funding, I'm certainly under no illusions that the NHS provides a basic level of service - something people often seem to forget. If you want more, you do have to pay.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Why?


    That doesn't even make any sense. The whole point of the private sector is that it is their to make profit. If ti is getting all of its money form the government then it wont be private.
    because it will make the industry more competitive in terms of services and affordability; the government on its own is pretty uncompetitive because it isn't based on profit, but if you lend out the money to the company in the market that is offering the best service and lowest price, that benefits the tax payers, and if that company starts to go bad and uncompetitive, the government can simply contract with the new better company in the market and can keep doing this whenever there is an opportunity to get more for less
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Interesting to see a fairly broad consensus in favour of private elements in the NHS. I wonder if the younger generation is more comfortable with that generally...
 
 
 

2,991

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.