|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Dec 20, 2019 18:10:50 GMT
What circumstances?
I dont see children as vital need myself so may need some convincing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Dec 20, 2019 18:45:36 GMT
What circumstances? I dont see children as vital need myself so may need some convincing. I think it is very human to have a natural desire to have children. I also understand the suffering of those who cannot conceive or those that have genetic predispositions. It is not a 'right' so to speak but it is certainly a significant part of any persons life and happiness if they so wish to parent. IVF should be offered to those that cannot conceive via normal means and that do not have children so far. I would also suggest that those who have had a child either through IVF or not that have suffered a bereavement be eligible too. It is also useful for ensuring genetic mutations are not passed on and so as part of genetic counselling and family planning it is important, particularly from a quality of life and cost position. Naturally those struggling to conceive have various options available to them such as donation, remaining childless, adoption and IVF. I think I would ask you to question your assertion that having children is not vital so why should we offer IVF, on two counts. Firstly, it may well not be vital for survival, at least from an individual and not a genetic standpoint. However, much of medicine as you of course know is more about improving quality of life and alleviating suffering as much as curation. If something is not vital, do we not still consider it? Limb prosthesis? Analgesia? If it's a matter of cost do we not consider the emotional and financial cost to the families and the healthcare services of individuals with genetic issues? Secondly, I will challenge that even if you hold that we should only offer vital services, what would constitute as vital to you? Vital to a couples emotional relationship? To a woman's mental health? To a bereaved mother wanting to try again? Now I do believe limits should apply of course. Whilst there are waits for cancer services (is palliative care vital?) we of course need to practice moderation. That said, for me, there is certainly a place for IVF and there are probably far less deserving procedures and interventions in my humblest. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2019 20:42:12 GMT
Wonderfully well argued Officer.
A couple of things jumped out at me from the points you raised.
Accepting most of what you say it appears to me that IVF transcends a medical into a moral argument.
If it becomes a moral argument are health care professionals "to close" to make that decision?
If we are to offer IVF then I think we need to take a blank piece of paper and fully cost a NHS using an actuarial style calculation of demand.
And put it to the people as a proposition for funding.
At the moment we, the taxpayers, have little idea of the true cost of a fully funded NHS offering unlimited services, so it becomes a political football.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2019 20:56:42 GMT
IVF is only available free once. After that it costs about 5,000 quid a go. This is not true. Some CCGs offer 3 cycles, others only 1. The recommendation is 3 cycles and NHSE are working towards standardizing this for all CCGs. I can only comment due to the experience of close friends. First attempt was free, then 5,000 quid every attempt after. It may be different in various Trusts. |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Dec 20, 2019 21:04:54 GMT
This is not true. Some CCGs offer 3 cycles, others only 1. The recommendation is 3 cycles and NHSE are working towards standardizing this for all CCGs. I can only comment due to the experience of close friends. First attempt was free, then 5,000 quid every attempt after. It may be different in various Trusts. It is different yes. Anecdotally there are reports people move house to trusts that offer more. Internal health tourism if you will. Many also go abroad for paid attenpts as it is far cheaper. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Dec 21, 2019 7:52:38 GMT
This is not true. Some CCGs offer 3 cycles, others only 1. The recommendation is 3 cycles and NHSE are working towards standardizing this for all CCGs. I can only comment due to the experience of close friends. First attempt was free, then 5,000 quid every attempt after. It may be different in various Trusts. A friend of mine ( female ) had two free goes. Unsuccessful, so they would have had to start paying. If they had the money. Which they don`t. As you say, must be different with different trusts. |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Dec 21, 2019 23:11:28 GMT
NHS: Free only to those who are born here or immigrants who work the rest of the world can curl up and die, also as for treating foreigners it should be like for like as an example you get ill on the moon and get treatment free then moon dwellers should get free treatment here, as for spending get rid of a layer or two of management ,bring back the old matron types , oh and stop nhs staff who treat patients from wearing their uniforms home ,i mean whats the point of staff trying to be clean when they sit on the bus in their work clothes
Immigration: People should be able to come to this country to live and work only if they have a job in the uk that cant be filled by someone already here, and must be healthy ,if they get terminally ill send em home
Criminal justice: Sentencing needs looking at really ,sentencing is a fecking joke in this country, some judges will give minimum sentences or non custodial sentences continually especially with serious crimes ,these judges should be neck shot. sentencing should be consistent whats the point in having tariffs for crime if this is seldom adhered to, and crime involving kids or sexual assault should result in the old spandau ballet coming back, or having their knob cut off via ball pein hammer and slowly bleeding out, 3 strikes and you are out as in some parts of the world, segregating prisoners will not work as if you get a custodial sentence then you will already be a long way down to the road to being a professional criminal, stop jails being a cushy number for a lot of people, lock em up for days at a time with no exercise, chuck their food on the floor make it unpleasant as you will be less inclined to go back
|
|
|
|
Post by inee on Dec 21, 2019 23:17:21 GMT
......
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Dec 21, 2019 23:53:30 GMT
I think you might have got the tone wrong here inee. This is about what we can all agree is a way forward, through compromise and logic. I don't really want to take issue with any specific points you've made, because it then degenerates into yet another political thread. But I would ask you to re-read the original point of the thread. |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Dec 22, 2019 0:07:00 GMT
I think you might have got the tone wrong here inee. This is about what we can all agree is a way forward, through compromise and logic. I don't really want to take issue with any specific points you've made, because it then degenerates into yet another political thread. But I would ask you to re-read the original point of the thread. i reread the op and unfortunately could not find a part that blind acceptance was a requirement for this thread ,you will notice i hope that not every post is a copy of hugo's points word for word, but an acceptance that those topics need discussion with individual input on ways to achieve that |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Dec 22, 2019 8:28:03 GMT
Thread essentially over with inees arrival I suspect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2019 8:43:19 GMT
Thread essentially over with inees arrival I suspect. As long as we dont react, hopefully not. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Dec 22, 2019 10:40:09 GMT
Thread essentially over with inees arrival I suspect. As long as we dont react, hopefully not. Surely we can all react, as long as we stick to voicing our opinions without insult, rancour, aggression or, er, anything else bad. Personally, I agree with everything Inee said, apart from nurses wearing their uniforms home. I like nurses in uniform. |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Dec 22, 2019 12:18:36 GMT
I'm not sure I could ever agree with anyone who has lived and paid taxes all their life in this country, built a family here etc being sent back to wherever they happened to come out of a vagina, to die, possibly homeless and alone, simply because they get terminal cancer. Frankly anyone that does believe that doesnt deserve to use the NHS in my opinion.
Nor could I ever agree that criminals should have their food served to them from the floor like animals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2019 12:25:25 GMT
I'm not sure I could ever agree with anyone who has lived and paid taxes all their life in this country, built a family here etc being sent back to wherever they happened to come out of a vagina, to die, possibly homeless and alone, simply because they get terminal cancer. Frankly anyone that does believe that doesnt deserve to use the NHS in my opinion. Nor could I ever agree that criminals should have their food served to them from the floor like animals. It beggars belief doesnt it |
|
|
|
Post by althepirate on Dec 22, 2019 12:35:50 GMT
As long as we dont react, hopefully not. Surely we can all react, as long as we stick to voicing our opinions without insult, rancour, aggression or, er, anything else bad. Personally, I agree with everything Inee said, apart from nurses wearing their uniforms home. I like nurses in uniform. So true William, that is where Oldie struggles with insults, aggression, rancour and everything bad. Hopefully we can educate him through these pages. Well we can try. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2019 20:05:55 GMT
Re The Justice System here are a few examples from Bristol Court cases during one week earlier this month.
There were 3 convictions for assaulting Police Officers. One got a curfew and £325 fine, one got 50 hours unpaid work and a £275 fine while another got a ‘Rehab Activity Requirement’ with a £190 fine. Another 1 was deemed a bit more serious and resulted in ‘Rehab’, 120 hours unpaid work and a £240 fine.
There were 3 convictions for disposing of a cigarette incorrectly. They got a £220 fine, a £220 fine and £472 fine respectively.
So we have a justice system that seems to think that dropping a cigarette butt is just as serious as assaulting a police officer. Is it any wonder there is so much crime and lack of respect for the law?
There were also 2 cases of deliberate benefit fraud. Another case of benefit fraud amounting to £90,000 led to the individual having two years added to a current sentence for sex offences. Of course some think there is little or no benefit fraud and everyone claiming is honest and entitled. Having several cases in just one week in one very small area would suggest there is a very significant problem which needs addressing. Nobody should bury their heads in the sand about this - every penny fraudulently claimed takes money out the pot available to those genuinely in need or requires those paying tax have to pay more.
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Dec 23, 2019 0:07:09 GMT
I'd like to see electoral reform.
I know it was rejected in the referendum a while back, but the proposal was a bodged, overcomplicated compromise, not well understood by many. The Tories and Labour are, understandably but sadly, cynically luke warm about it.
Some say full PR will lead to coalition governments, and therefore weak governments. Coalitions, like they have in many successful western European countries can and do work. I don't want to be ruled by any party with 40% of the votes but 60% of the seats.
To me, it's just about fairness and representation of the people.
If the Brexit party got 10% of the vote, they should have 65 seats. The Green Party are also underrepresented, and the Lib Dems have suffered massively under FPTP.
It's not a political issue to me. Just logical and fair.
|
|
|
|
Post by althepirate on Dec 23, 2019 0:29:42 GMT
Re The Justice System here are a few examples from Bristol Court cases during one week earlier this month. There were 3 convictions for assaulting Police Officers. One got a curfew and £325 fine, one got 50 hours unpaid work and a £275 fine while another got a ‘Rehab Activity Requirement’ with a £190 fine. Another 1 was deemed a bit more serious and resulted in ‘Rehab’, 120 hours unpaid work and a £240 fine. There were 3 convictions for disposing of a cigarette incorrectly. They got a £220 fine, a £220 fine and £472 fine respectively. So we have a justice system that seems to think that dropping a cigarette butt is just as serious as assaulting a police officer. Is it any wonder there is so much crime and lack of respect for the law? There were also 2 cases of deliberate benefit fraud. Another case of benefit fraud amounting to £90,000 led to the individual having two years added to a current sentence for sex offences. Of course some think there is little or no benefit fraud and everyone claiming is honest and entitled. Having several cases in just one week in one very small area would suggest there is a very significant problem which needs addressing. Nobody should bury their heads in the sand about this - every penny fraudulently claimed takes money out the pot available to those genuinely in need or requires those paying tax have to pay more. That's incredible, I had no idea this was happening. How on earth did we arrive here? The justice system seems to forget that punishment isn't just for the culprit but for the rest of us to deter us from doing the same. I cannot see how these punishments are a deterrent at all. |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Dec 23, 2019 1:32:06 GMT
I'd like to see electoral reform. I know it was rejected in the referendum a while back, but the proposal was a bodged, overcomplicated compromise, not well understood by many. The Tories and Labour are, understandably but sadly, cynically luke warm about it. Some say full PR will lead to coalition governments, and therefore weak governments. Coalitions, like they have in many successful western European countries can and do work. I don't want to be ruled by any party with 40% of the votes but 60% of the seats. To me, it's just about fairness and representation of the people. If the Brexit party got 10% of the vote, they should have 65 seats. The Green Party are also underrepresented, and the Lib Dems have suffered massively under FPTP. It's not a political issue to me. Just logical and fair. I agree something needs to be done but pr is not the answer. The reason the lib dems are not getting seats is nothing to do with fptp its because the lib dems have been on the decline for as long as i can remember, even before the liberals and sdp merged. The greens are a major danger to people in this country. If as you say its about fairness and representation of the people, would you accept every type of party that would gain seats under pr as undoubtedly some extremist groups will gain seats as that would be the trade off. |
|
