idun Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 [quote user="breizh"][quote user="NickP"][quote user="breizh"] However the tight fisted Brits want everything cheap[:D][/quote]That is an outrageous thing to say, I have paid my way under the system as it stands, and so have a lot of other people; we are entitled to what ever is necessary. I don't expect any thing on the cheap, and when I'm in France I get what I'm entitled to; as does your "blue eyed blond" when she is in England. [:P] [/quote]The point was that certain parts of the media would tell you that ALL NHS treatment is free the moment any foreigner steps off a boat or a plane. NOT TRUE. The same rules apply to the NHS as to the CMU. I won't get into arguement. Just stating the rules.[/quote]I know the rules having had to contact the Dept of Health and Newcastle. IF your wife was resident she should have been treat just like everyone else, UNLESS ofcourse she was in the same situation as us and her income, or if she was dependant on yours and it came from France or elsewhere, then it is different.Residents in general get more or less everything free....... not prescriptions, unless on benefit or over 60 etc. Dentists are paid an amount, but not always, once again under certain circumstances it's free. There are all sorts of these bits and pieces that one may be required to pay. As a rule I would say it is just about free to residents, and that is from the day they become residents, unless they, like us, don't quite fit within the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frederick Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I read that there are only two other organisations in the world who employ more people than the NHS......The Chinese army and the Indian railway........ Do people really expect the NHS to go on growing ? Is there to be no limit on how much tax money it needs to suck from us all ?There is a hell of a lot the private sector should in my view take off the NHS and ......charge people for ... Supporting people to have kids when they find it hard to produce them for a start ... Tough luck for some but its not the sort of thing the NHS was invented for .i Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 How do you work that out ? If you are born with x, y or z missing/not working you are entitled to treatment, but not if it happens to be your reproductive system ? Seems a little odd to me....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarkkent Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 [quote user="Russethouse"]How do you work that out ? If you are born with x, y or z missing/not working you are entitled to treatment, but not if it happens to be your reproductive system ? Seems a little odd to me.......[/quote]You wouldn't be referring to pde5 inhibitors, would you?When Viagra was introduced, the Secretary of State for Health, one Frank Dobson, seemed to be of the opinion that demand for it would swamp the drug budget and so - apart from for a few specific conditions - made it available only privately. I suspect he had been leaned by the Treasury!So, women who want to have sexual relations with their partners and avoid pregnancy can have their pills free. Men with erectile dysfunction who want to have sexual relations with their partners have to pay for it - sounds like prostitution to me with the drug companies as Madams!Why hasn't this been challenged under sex equality/human rights legislation?During the next couple of years the patents start expiring. The Indian pharmaceutical industry will start feeling the pain as their internet sales of copies of Viagra and Cialis fall! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 You wouldn't be referring to pde5 inhibitors, would youWell I wasn't...but I'll bow to your superior knowledge [:)] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Here is an example of what is wrong with the NHS which I picked up on the telly last night in a Brit programme dubbed into French.A guy was really obese, couldn't walk, stayed in his bed all the time etc., and was due to have his stomach reduced so he could lose the 200kg necessary for staying alive (so you have an idea of how much he weighed). But, he was so fat that the surgeons could not use their instruments with risk of severe damage to the guy and the instruments. So they said that the guy could only have the operation if he managed to lose 50kg. With immense effort he loses the 50kg over several months but is then REFUSED the operation because he has managed to lose some weight and can continue to do so. Guy has lost weight in the past but always put it on again.Finally he gets the op and loses 200kgs - new man, now even has girlfriend. And is positively svelte, happy etc.So, some bureaucrat nearly killed him and overrode the doctors until they managed to get the decision changed - what a mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprogster Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Clarkekent, I am fairly certain that Viagra and its ilk are now available free on the NHS if you have a qualifying medical condition that warrants it. Not that I have any personal experience of this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooperlola Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Surely the point of preventing unwanted pregnancies is to save money on child support and welfare costs later? People are going to have sex regardless, aren't they and with far more at risk if they don't take precautions? You still have to pay for condoms and they prevent desease as well as brats.I have more of a problem with endless IVF and other treatments for the childless. OK, I guess I don't get the pull of maternal and paternal instinct myself (Mr C and I have been cursed with neither, thankfully), but surely there should at least be a limit on the amount contributed by the state for this? There are far too many of us as it is. And yes, I've heard all the argument about paying for our old age pensions/healthcare etc but sooner or later countries have to face these facts and ensure that we all make provision for our own old age, not expect others to pay up in the future. If that means I have to pay more, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Many of the IVF treatments are needed because couples or just ladies have decided to postpone their pregnancies until their later years and are thus unable to have children. It is questionable whether their treatment should be paid for by the NHS, though the number of tries is being limited.On the other hand, obesity is also a lifestyle choice in most cases and maybe should be treated similarly, as is smoking and alcoholism. Then there is drug addiction....So we get down to the basic question of what the NHS is for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Maybe its different in other areas but here IVF is limited to one try, after that its many thousands of pounds just for one try........a relative of mine had to pay which seemed pretty rough to me as a large contributory factor was that another hospital had dismissed symptoms of accute pelvic area pain resulting in an emergency admission and damaged fallopian tubes......LOL Wooly, isn't this a case of their none being worse than the converted [;-)][;-)]As for ladies postponing their pregnancies I'd suggest that there are social reasons for that with many having to work full time to help with the mortgage among other things, you don't need to have a very out of the ordinary lifestyle to need two salaries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frederick Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I believe in the NHS being there for people who are in ... Poor Health .. If due to illness .. accident ..or defect of birth people are in need of help to give them a opportunity to live and support themselves in society with full mobility free from pain then long may the NHS continue and free to all ..However those who are fit and active holding down jobs or not ... and living among us and are just "unhappy " because they dont like the face / body they were born with or have gender issues If they want to seek to alter that then the NHS should not be open to them . As for choosing when to give birth and needing help because they have postponed their pregnancy ... Why should I out of my taxes have to fund them ? They made the choice ...Let them save up and pay for their own treatment they must know there will be a chance they are going to need it . And the overweight ones who need special handling by jumbo ambulance etc .... give them a bill l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I wonder if you are trying for a baby how you work out whether any failure was because you waited ? We all know that a womans fertility decreases as they get older but lots of older mothers do have children without treatment....In addition many couples would want to wait until they are in a position to give a child a decent home, these days that could easily be mid 30'sI think its kind of weird that if some bits of you don't work its Ok to for the NHS to spend money on them, but not if its your reproductive system.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Having children is not a right, RH, an certainly not if there are other priorities such as cancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I agree, however if your reproductive system isn't working why should it be discounted as not being worth spending money on ? I recently had my hand operated on, it wasn't strictly essential but no one suggested I just put up with it....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillan Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I am sitting on the fence halfway between RH and Wooly.Infertility can be a medical problem and I think those who have this problem do deserve treatment. However there must be a limit and some boundaries, you can't keep on giving and receiving treatment for years with it costing thousands. A limit should be put on the number of attempts for a start (perhaps one attempt at ICSI and GIFT) and women who have just moved in to menopause at the 'normal' age (the UK average is 52 I believe) should not receive treatment to reverse it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 To be fair, Q, I think it is restricted in both senses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pommier Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Regarding obese people, there's a series about them on UK television currently, and the amount of money which each of these people must cost the state has to be enormous. I do think that they ought to be treated (it must surely be some sort of mental illness), but once a person is too big to move unaided, isn't it time to hospitalise them? Their diets could be controlled and instead of each of them having specially adapted council accomodation with winches and special beds and chairs, it could be centralised in one ward for each area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 [quote user="woolybanana"]To be fair, Q, I think it is restricted in both senses[/quote] If I remember correctly the couple I know were given one treatment on the NHS and paid for two themselves - none was successful and they went on to adopt three siblings. (the oldest was just three years old!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Ice-ni Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 So why this obsession with DIY when you can buy ready made?John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooperlola Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 [quote user="Mr Ice-ni"]So why this obsession with DIY when you can buy ready made?John[/quote][:)] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 With ready made, you don't know what you are getting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooperlola Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 [quote user="woolybanana"]With ready made, you don't know what you are getting![/quote]From the look of some people's offspring, DIY isn't that reliable either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 hahahahahahahahahahaha, well done Mrs Pooksie[:D] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Ice-ni Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 When you list all those aspects of life where passing an exam or some sort of test is deemed necessary why is the most important and potentially expensive thing open to all and sundry in an unregulated way ? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooperlola Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Bit like voting really, John. Any idiot's allowed to do it.[:)] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now