Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 8:01:04 GMT
Transvestism, transgender and transexual is nothing like being basically gay. There is a pretty good case to argue that's it's not a choice either though for some it is. I agree that the NHS needs to look at what things we currently offer free of charge I accept that, what causes me some doubt is what appears to be a sudden increase (if there is). I know that what I will now say will cause some controversy, but here goes....... Body armour on. Sometimes nature does get things wrong. We are all aware of this, and in these genuine cases then we should provide medical help where it is needed. However, I do believe that the explosion in 'transgender issues' is basically a mental health problem, and not the results of nature making mistakes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 8:26:33 GMT
I accept that, what causes me some doubt is what appears to be a sudden increase (if there is). I know that what I will now say will cause some controversy, but here goes....... Body armour on. Sometimes nature does get things wrong. We are all aware of this, and in these genuine cases then we should provide medical help where it is needed. However, I do believe that the explosion in 'transgender issues' is basically a mental health problem, and not the results of nature making mistakes. No need for body armour. I have a lot of sympathy for that viewpoint. |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 8, 2018 10:56:03 GMT
I know that what I will now say will cause some controversy, but here goes....... Body armour on. Sometimes nature does get things wrong. We are all aware of this, and in these genuine cases then we should provide medical help where it is needed. However, I do believe that the explosion in 'transgender issues' is basically a mental health problem, and not the results of nature making mistakes. No need for body armour. I have a lot of sympathy for that viewpoint. Thankyou Sharon. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 11:07:36 GMT
No need for body armour. I have a lot of sympathy for that viewpoint. Thankyou Sharon. 😁👍 |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Aug 8, 2018 12:40:43 GMT
Seriously though we do need to look at what the NHS should cover. Obviously when Nye Bevan brought the NHS into being he could not have envisaged what technology would bring. Equally, when Equality Laws are drafted, unintended consequences should be considered. As a starter for ten these are some the things that should be paid for privately. Fertility Treatment Abortion where failure to take precaution is obvious Correction of failed privately delivered cosmetic surgery A&E service due to alcohol, drugs or fighting. something i agree with you on in the main ,the first point i agree with to a certain extent ,i know a few people who have tried fertility treatment and i has failed to say they were devastated was an understatement ,i do however have to put on the hard hat and say i believe it should be offered to the traditional male/female couples only ,another thing related to this is people getting treatment should if they agree be assessed by social services (obviously they get a choice) ,with a view to becoming foster parents in the future ,some go down hat route but both are very long paths Totally agree these days as he morning after pill is freely available ,it should also be available to those who are genuinely vulnerable. Plastic surgery disasters (Fantastic LP that  ) It's something that really winds me up ,some go abroad or to backtstreet surgeons ,ruin their bodies then expect to get it fixed for fee ,i can sympathise if they have suffer with BDD however most in that category will have attempted diy surgery ,but those at he lower end of the scale are likely to follow the route i mentioned earlier The last one is probably the most difficult one to asses in a firm way and fair way as to who should pay and who should not ,often the 3 things you mention are bought about by mental illness. But and it's a big but not everyone who get injured that way are suffering with a mental illness ,separating the two is very difficult ,which leads me to a little side track ,there should be an nhs register for all patient s with limited info available so if someone get s into one of the situations mentioned then upon typing their name that type of info would show up along with other info such as medical conditions which would impact on their safe treatment ,if your not on the list you get billed |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 8, 2018 12:59:13 GMT
Screw it, can't afford it? Tough. Should have earnt more to pay for it. Stop expecting others to pay for your treatment. Bloody lightweights.
|
|
|
|
Post by inee on Aug 8, 2018 13:36:14 GMT
The way it works here in Germany is that basically the hospital's treat you if you are 'broken' (if you get my drift). Anything else, then you have to go to a Specialist Doctor outside of the hospital. NHS. Fertility treatment - Usually the first attempt is free, but then it's 5,000 quid a go. You also missed out Gastric Bands. On Fertility I think the guidance is 3 rounds, although not all Health Authorities offer the whole 3 Gastric bands. Not so sure because if effective the saving on long term costs due to health issues associated with obesity may make it a false economy That is an interesting one ,as it isn't a be all and end all fix ,it takes a lot of will power to make it work as intended as recipients have to change their habits ,from memory a gastric band creates a small stomach to fool the brain into sending i'm full up messages to the brain and holds about 1 /2 a cup of food ,it takes a while for the body to do this reliably ,so patients have to not keep stuffing until those full up messages are sent reliably , can you see a pattern here ,it's ultimately down to the individual to learn to not to overfeed ,so in my view if they have to change their eating habits for it to work surely they can do the same without the surgery(i know it's not the same for everyone) ,surely as pill makers and medical scientists know what sends the message why cant they some p with a medication to help ,i know appetite suppressants are available but don't work for all ,surely they can develop a slow release medication that works a month at a time ,you can get contraceptive implants that last for a few months , the happy pills i take are slow release over a 24hr period so i just have to take one lot a day rather than 3 or 4 lots a day , imo the reason this would be good idea is that when your on long term meds it's very easy to decide your ok now and stop taking them ,so say a weeks dose maybe taken at a chemists ,would be an ideal way to keep an eye out until that persons next appointment(a note on the pc for the gp to read lets face it it's easy for people to fall off the radar ) and also to get them outside even if t's only for a few minute. Gastric bands can have some very nasty side effects so can end up costing a small fortune in further treatments. The biggest issues wit a lot of conditions is breaking the habits and the triggers from those habits |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 13:55:42 GMT
Screw it, can't afford it? Tough. Should have earnt more to pay for it. Stop expecting others to pay for your treatment. Bloody lightweights. Now now. Not that at all. 100% free at the point of need. BUT, for example, if a 19 year gets into trouble through drink and drugs and as a result needs A&E then the cost should be recharged. Easy to do, take his or her social security number and relate it back to their HMRC reference. Recharge it through payroll or leave it as an outstanding debt until payable. We can't keep wasting limited resources on police and health care on people who just can't behave themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 8, 2018 15:13:41 GMT
Screw it, can't afford it? Tough. Should have earnt more to pay for it. Stop expecting others to pay for your treatment. Bloody lightweights. Now now. Not that at all. 100% free at the point of need. BUT, for example, if a 19 year gets into trouble through drink and drugs and as a result needs A&E then the cost should be recharged. Easy to do, take his or her social security number and relate it back to their HMRC reference. Recharge it through payroll or leave it as an outstanding debt until payable. We can't keep wasting limited resources on police and health care on people who just can't behave themselves. The drinks industry, pubs and clubs can surely do more? Who is serving these fuckwits who can't handle their drink. They should be refused drink long before A&E have to deal with them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 15:21:53 GMT
Now now. Not that at all. 100% free at the point of need. BUT, for example, if a 19 year gets into trouble through drink and drugs and as a result needs A&E then the cost should be recharged. Easy to do, take his or her social security number and relate it back to their HMRC reference. Recharge it through payroll or leave it as an outstanding debt until payable. We can't keep wasting limited resources on police and health care on people who just can't behave themselves. The drinks industry, pubs and clubs can surely do more? Who is serving these fuckwits who can't handle their drink. They should be refused drink long before A&E have to deal with them. Yes agree with that. Trouble is a lot of this starts before they get to the venue. And of course so called legal highs add to the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Aug 8, 2018 20:48:33 GMT
Take it from someone who knows, its about litigation. In Slovenia if you pass out watered in the street you might die. If you did that would be your fault, noone would suggest someone should have taken responsibility for you. Here the police wont take you to a cell because you could aspirate and they would be ruined, the paramedics cant leave you there for the same reason so off they go to A and E (Anything and Everything). The fighting is a mixed bag in terms of age groups and the mainstream drugs aren't particularly problematic but these legal highs are crazy, unknown, untested and high dependency. The sooner they legalise cannabis the better and frankly I'd be up for a debate on legalizing the lot. We have created our own perpetual cycle. It's ok to get so bladders you end up in ED because the police aren't interested and you won't die. Start dishing out warnings that you have to declare to your employer and people may think twice. Now it's just a trophy for Facebook.
On the sex change thing the obvious answer is this. Where people are still waiting for cancer referrals, no you can't have a cock glued on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 21:49:59 GMT
Take it from someone who knows, its about litigation. In Slovenia if you pass out watered in the street you might die. If you did that would be your fault, noone would suggest someone should have taken responsibility for you. Here the police wont take you to a cell because you could aspirate and they would be ruined, the paramedics cant leave you there for the same reason so off they go to A and E (Anything and Everything). The fighting is a mixed bag in terms of age groups and the mainstream drugs aren't particularly problematic but these legal highs are crazy, unknown, untested and high dependency. The sooner they legalise cannabis the better and frankly I'd be up for a debate on legalizing the lot. We have created our own perpetual cycle. It's ok to get so bladders you end up in ED because the police aren't interested and you won't die. Start dishing out warnings that you have to declare to your employer and people may think twice. Now it's just a trophy for Facebook. On the sex change thing the obvious answer is this. Where people are still waiting for cancer referrals, no you can't have a cock glued on. Right, ok So if it is litigation the service providers are concerned about then let's amend the legislation. It's simple, if you act stupidly, under you own free will, you will be recharged. If however it goes wrong and something really bad happens, subject to acceptable due diligence, then that's your fault and there is no recourse. On drugs. Absolutely, legalise the lot and tax it. If you do it don't expect expensive care, just as smokers get held back from heart surgery unless they quit. It's about time we got back to individual responsibility. Btw, I am guilty also. I drink far too much. But having reached a certain age, DNR is the order of the day, if it comes to that. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Aug 12, 2018 22:20:37 GMT
Should the NHS fund people who break their legs rock climbing?
Should the NHS fund people who are injured through accidents caused by their speeding in cars?
Should the NHS fund people who suffer from the effects of legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco?
Should the NHS fund people who take illegal drugs?
Should the NHS fund unwell murderers in prison?
Should the NHS fund obese people?
Yes to all.
It's a universal healthcare system. That's the point of it.
If you start excluding certain types of risk-takers, from people who take heroin to people who cross the road without bothering to look, then we may as well shut it down now.
When someone arrives in A&E, are the doctors, before offering medical care, supposed to assess whether the life threatening injury was caused by accident or negligence?
And if they decide it was negligence, do they push the patient out onto the street?
We could just close it down, and we can all save a bit of taxation, and pay a lot more in private healthcare premiums.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 13, 2018 4:06:04 GMT
Should the NHS fund people who break their legs rock climbing? Should the NHS fund people who are injured through accidents caused by their speeding in cars? Should the NHS fund people who suffer from the effects of legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco? Should the NHS fund people who take illegal drugs? Should the NHS fund unwell murderers in prison? Should the NHS fund obese people? Yes to all. It's a universal healthcare system. That's the point of it. If you start excluding certain types of risk-takers, from people who take heroin to people who cross the road without bothering to look, then we may as well shut it down now. When someone arrives in A&E, are the doctors, before offering medical care, supposed to assess whether the life threatening injury was caused by accident or negligence? And if they decide it was negligence, do they push the patient out onto the street? We could just close it down, and we can all save a bit of taxation, and pay a lot more in private healthcare premiums. I agree with you to some degree but the NHS is not a limitless service. It can't go on doing everything for everyone. Certain things (like your rock climbing example) could be paid for by insurance cover. Some sort of "fine" for being treated when watered up may help deter or raise revenue perhaps. Maybe taxes on alcohol and especially cigs should be properly ringfenced and go directly to the NHS rather than central government? Same goes for the sugar tax. Legalization of lower class drugs would also generate a lot of tax and potentially lower crime which could be win/win. Legal highs need to be reclassified as they are a massive problem too. I'm not certain about any of my ideas here, but a discussion needs to be had to find some solutions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 9:19:08 GMT
Here is the rub.
If, for example, you take out travel insurance, you are asked if you are taking part in certain sports or activities. If the answer is yes your premium rises accordingly.
If you speed, get caught, your insurance premium rises.
If you have accidents, through careless driving, ditto.
If however, you get so watered up or similar and need A&E, the cost is shared by all of us. Including those whose incomes and responsibilities preclude them from doing that.
That's BS and needs to be addressed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 9:45:11 GMT
I think you have to be very very careful if you want to exclude certain things from NHS treatment, if it is claimed to be 'your fault'. Originally in this thread, it was mainly about things like Cosmetic Treatment being available for free. The conversation has moved onto things like alcohol accidents etc, and this is where it gets complicated. In this day and age, we all know full well that things get distorted. For example, I have read articles that claim that people who have accidents doing DIY should not get free treatment, and that if you fall off a ladder (for example) then it is your own fault and you should have got a professional in to do the work. This sort of attitude is of course, complete nonsense, but you can see the warped logic of some on display here.
Break a leg playing football on a Saturday? Your fault, as it's a self-inflicted injury and you really didn't need to be playing football.
DIY accident? Your fault as you should have got a professional in to do the work........can you see where this is going?
The government make people pay through the taxation system for the NHS, so it has a duty to provide that medical care if you need it. It doesn't matter if you fall off a ladder, are a smoker, or injure yourself doing sport. It is the system that 'they' produced, so 'they' should provide treatment when you are broken.
I believe the NHS should be there to fix broken people. How you got broke is no concern of the hospital. The NHS is not there to provide 'cosmetic treatment' to make someone look, or feel better.
I agree with the extra insurance for certain things. As an example, I have Scuba Diving insurance, because there is the possibility that if something goes wrong, I would need the use of a Hyperbaric Chamber. These are expensive and I have no problems taking out the insurance as I am aware that this particular treatment is not available everywhere.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 10:24:13 GMT
Nobby
It's your last point and an emphasis on behaviour after alcohol or drug taking leading to use of the NHS that should be charged. We are not talking about activities that 100s of 000s take part in like sport, and something all of us do at some point like DIY.
The behavioural thing is important as it includes costs of policing etc, not just the NHS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 10:41:14 GMT
Nobby It's your last point and an emphasis on behaviour after alcohol or drug taking leading to use of the NHS that should be charged. We are not talking about activities that 100s of 000s take part in like sport, and something all of us do at some point like DIY. The behavioural thing is important as it includes costs of policing etc, not just the NHS. Too complicated Oldie. What if you've had a few too many, and being sensible, you catch a taxi home.....which is then in an accident that requires you to go to hospital......Is it the job of the hospital to determine what caused your injuries, and did the alcohol play a part? |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 13, 2018 10:43:09 GMT
Shoot me down, but the tax smokers pay on tobacco pretty much holds up the NHS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 10:45:16 GMT
Shoot me down, but the tax smokers pay on tobacco pretty much holds up the NHS. and the same could be said for the tax paid on alcohol ! |
|
) It's something that really winds me up ,some go abroad or to backtstreet surgeons ,ruin their bodies then expect to get it fixed for fee ,i can sympathise if they have suffer with BDD however most in that category will have attempted diy surgery ,but those at he lower end of the scale are likely to follow the route i mentioned earlier 
