Are you for or against private medecine? What do you think and why?

Question

Already some helpful responses,thanks. I too have experience of both. When you compare the NHS to the health systems of France or USA for example, where they pay for treatment each time, do you think it's better to have private treatment,or are the poorer people who can't afford it being marginalised?? Keep those answers coming! Thank you!

Answer 1

i have been studying this issue for several months and have concluded that it would never work. so forget about it!

Answer 2

I think that Private Health is NOT the right way to go. i have worked in the operating theatres of both the NHS and private health industry and can honestly say that I DO NOT and WILL NEVER go private if at all possible. The care received in the private sector is no better and sometimes worse than the NHS. They private sector is there to make as much money as possible for their shareholders and the care of the patients in some clinics is of secondary consideration. My answer for the NHS is to stop the Members of Parliment, of all parties, using Private health and making them use the NHS. If this was anyother company it would be seen as a conflict of interest.

Answer 3

Private medicine has been around for longer than the NHS so for those who argue it's a drain on the NHS then you have to consider who came first?
There are approximately 10 million people who have some kind of medical insurance in the UK, imagine if those people were added on to the already enormous waiting lists? Banning private medical insurers would not cure the NHS' ills, it would make them significantly worse.
Remember, the people who have medical insurance still have to pay their national insurance as well as their insurance premiums so they are effectively paying twice, how can this be a drian of the NHS?
The majority of consultants and specialists who do private work also put in long hours for the NHS. One of the reasons we have so few students wishing to become medical professionals is because there is almost an assumption they should, if they have any morals, work for the NHS which pays significantly less than private practice. This is unfair, why should a surgeon who has trained for 10 years limit his earning potential? Should all lawyers work in citizens advice bureaus? the answer to both questions as far as i can see is no.
The majority of private hospitals allow NHS patients to use their equipment when not in use, CAT scanners and MRI scanners are a good example, because of years of neglect, mis-management, beaurocracy and overspending the NHS is in a worse state now than it's ever been. Private medical companies are actually helping the NHS out in their crises.
Private medicine has been around longer than the NHS, for those who think it's a drain on their resources should think about the consequences for the NHS of not having a provision for private care.
I am against Private companies taking over from accident and emergency/primary care, they never have and probably never will, however if, as an individual, I can pay for my hip replacement next week rather than wait (for an agonising year) to have the operation as an NHS patient i know which option i would take.
I'm not writing this as a lay person with no knowledge of the situation, My partner is a hospital Pharmacist in the NHS, and we have many friends who are consultants and GP's. All of them agree that whilst the general public will jump on negative stories about the provision of Private care in private hospitals, the vast majority of people who have elective surgeries as a private patient do so without any problems whatsoever
Lastly, if you wanted to eradicate private medical insurance and rely soley on the NHS then your income tax would have to rise by 10-15% . I don't think this would be a viable option for many people.
I am not against Private medicine and I'm not against the NHS, it provides a very good service and it's something we should protect and treasure, it's certainly saved my skin on a number of occasions. However, Private and 'public' provision of health services have always existed side by side and if one were to go then there would be all sorts of trouble for the other. It would not work.

Answer 4

If you are referring to private doctors having their own business, taking in patients and billing them, at this point in time I would say no. The reason for me is there is too much gouging by the manufacturers of medical equipment and supplies, who can charge whatever they like because of the specialty of their product. Doctors have no choice but to pass this on to their patients, which causes certain people to be unable to afford good health. While there would be a large curve to achieve for efficiency in publicised medicine, I believe the medical profession should be a craft, not a business any more. Furthermore, I think good health of human beings should not be judged by the size of the wallet. In this area I am ethically challenged to the 'nth' degree.

Answer 5

I am for privatized medicine. I have worked in academic centers, employed as a physician and as a partner in a group with some non-partnership employees(for a variety of reasons). Without a sense of ownership many individuals have what I refer to as an employee mentality. They expect to do the minimum and extract the maximum with little or no responsibility. Yes I am talking about even physicians before anyone gets too haughty.
The most efficient hard workers are employee-owners in any situation. We have more to lose and take greater pride in our work-period.

Answer 6

As a Briton and a trade union officer I am completely opposed to private medicine as I believe it undermines the principles of our National Health Service.

Please don't try to tell me that private medicine is complimentary...it isn't and never has been. It is a drain on the NHS because of the lousy consultants who filch NHS equipment and staff to do their private work.

There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that NHS patients have died as a result of this when with a proper service being available to them...they would have survived.

Answer 7

It all depends upon which situation you're in. My husband is receiving social security benefits and I am disabled (will get benefits in Feb.). So right now we're living on $1130 a month. Only last year we were both working and had insurance. My husband was hurt and may end up on SS disability yet. However, from what I've learned, we won't qualify for Medicaid because we will make too much. I have to go there and apply....I can't believe they won't help us. We are in our sixties. Guess what I want now. Universal medical care!

Answer 8

I used to be against private medicine, but I'm not anymore and I'll tell you why.

For five years, I did not have medical insurance in the US because I had grown too old for my parents' insurance and I could not afford private insurance. The company I worked at did not offer insurance to entry level positions and I could not afford it on my own at the little wages I made. The only reason I have insurance now is because I am in graduate school and they offer student insurance at a lower rate. Plus, I can use the school clinic for free or at affordable costs. The insurance I have isn't all that great, but it's better than nothing.

Those five years without medical insurance were terrifying. I knew that if I were in a major accident or was diagnosed with a disease, there was no way I would be able to afford treatment. I would probably have had to declare bankruptcy to cover everything (the number of Americans declaring bankruptcy to cover medical costs grows every year). I saw a doctor maybe three times in those five years when I got so sick that I couldn't stand it anymore. I was lucky to have a doctor that was sympathetic and gave me drugs that I normally couldn't afford for free or wrote me a script for a generic brand. I had a horrible ear infection that normal antibiotics couldn't clear up. The drugs I needed were way beyond my budget, so I had to wait a month to save up the money for them and borrow from friends and family. In the meantime, my eardrums ruptured twice and I have suffered permanent hearing loss...all because I couldn't afford the drugs. This is shameful to the US considering this is one of the richest and prosperous countries in the world with excellent medical care (that I can't afford). The number of Americans with little or no medical insurance continues to rise every year and it's shameful.

I also avoided recommended annual exams because I couldn't afford them. If it weren't for the school clinic, I still would be avoiding them. My insurance doesn't cover annual exams and that's not unusual. Many private insurance companies don't cover recommended American Medical Association "preventable care" like annuals, mammograms, pap smears, etc. That policy is asinine because those screenings are designed to catch problems early enough where they can be treated quickly. It's much, much more expensive to treat diseases when someone finally comes into the doctor only to be diagnosed with an advanced disease. Stage 1 cancer is easier and more economical to treat than Stage 3 cancer. I firmly believe that more people would have their annuals if we had public medicine that covered it or made it more affordable. In turn, we would have a healthier population and easily treated disease rates would decline.

Don't get me wrong. I do believe that doctors should be paid well for their education and expertise, but it shouldn't be excessive. The problem is that the average Joe can't afford to pay Dr. Bob and General Hospital thousands and thousands of dollars for his cancer treatments, and that's even when Joe has medical insurance. Joe is forced to declare bankruptcy, which raises the question: How does forcing your patients to declare bankruptcy help? The hospitals and doctors STILL don't get paid because those debts are written off. It makes more sense to have public medicine that is affordable to citizens. If it comes to paying higher taxes for public medicine, then sign me up! Americans already moan about how expensive our taxes are, but they are nothing compared to how much other countries pay! This is because taxes for medical coverage are added in.

I also believe that a combination of public and private insurance is feasible. I do believe that people should fund part of their health care, but within their means. Medicare and Medicaid are not sufficient enough and not enough people are eligible for it or are denied coverage. I live below the federal poverty limit and I don't qualify for most benefits. Public medicine will make health care affordable for everyone, not just the citizens who are fortunate to be able to afford insurance and/or make enough to set aside in a health care savings fund.

Answer 9

In principle, I'm against private medical care.

In practice, it's so much better that I'd use it if I could.

I've experienced both. Private hosptials are clean and well managed, the staff are extremely attentive, and the food is fab.

The doctors treat you like valued customers rather than yet another pain in the a*se.

Sorry, but these are the facts.

Answer 10

Definitely private. If you get the government involved, your quality of care will go down. If the doctors are only paid by the government what is their incentive, really. And the bottom line is then the government is calling the shots on your care. Do you really want to place your life in the hands of the government?