you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 4 days ago (1 child)

UK here.

If you're waiting 12 hours in a&e, your condition almost certainly is not life threatening. Sprained arm, or a bad cold? You're potentially waiting a while. Head injury, or heart issues? You're not touching a waiting room seat.

The NHS can be slow as sin for non-acute issues. It took almost a year to get a benign, but disruptive lump removed. Major complications while giving birth? Instant, full blown, treatment.

We still have some private medicine. The existence of the NHS keeps their prices and practices in check. It's no longer "pay or die" instead its "pay for convenience".

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    in a&e

    I've never understood why Brits feel the need to add "accident" to emergency. Are there people who are waiting there because they've had an accident but there's no emergency?

    We still have some private medicine. The existence of the NHS keeps their prices and practices in check. It’s no longer “pay or die” instead its “pay for convenience”.

    This is how it may start. But, be careful because as more people start using the private option, the public option starts getting starved for funds, and then bit by bit there is no public option.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    They have been trying to starve the NHS for a while. Thankfully the staff that make the NHS what it is are pushing back as best they can.

    As for the "accident" in A&E. It caters for situations that aren't to the level of emergencies, but need dealing with. E.g. I had an accident during a martial arts spar. I injured my wrist, and needed to know if it was broken or just bruised. A&E gave it an x-ray, it wasn't broken. I successfully competed in a competition a day later. It definitely wasn't an emergency, but I needed the results of an accident taken care of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    That's more "injury" than "accident". And what about illness? Surely people also go there if they have a high fever, or are unable to stop vomiting, these illnesses may not rise to the level of an emergency, but they're not something you feel like waiting a while for an appointment for. So, you could still classify them as a mild emergency, but they're certainly not an accident. If you want to keep a list of things you might end up in that room for, it would be accident, injury, illness and emergency. I may be forgetting other things though. "Emergency" just seems cleaner because it can cover anything that's urgent enough that you need to stay in the waiting room and have it treated today-ish.

    And really, it's not the job of the NHS to push back. It's the job of the voters, the people who use the NHS and don't want to see it destroyed. In Canada we have provincial level care, and they keep trying to starve that too. Fortunately, it isn't working very well. In fact, there has been a very slight expansion of the care the government provides lately in that some dental care is now covered too. But, idiots keep thinking that a partially private system can work. As soon as something becomes partially private, the rich people start using it and then lobby the government to try to avoid having to pay taxes on the thing they're no longer using.

  • source
  • parent