'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed

'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed

www.telegraph.co.uk...

I despise our insurance-dependent system. I do not want a third party coming between me and my health care provider. I don't want insurance calling the shots. I don't want government doing so even more.

I know, millions of Britons are perfectly happy with a "public option."

But when the horror stories begin flowing out like water, from independent and unbiased sources, isn't it a sign that something might be wrong?

One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today.

This is just the latest in what seems to amount to a series of disclosures of the inadequacies, and unbearable expense of, a government-controlled health care system.

In the last six years, the Patients Association claims hundreds of thousands have suffered from poor standards of nursing, often with 'neglectful, demeaning, painful and sometimes downright cruel' treatment.

The charity has disclosed a horrifying catalogue of elderly people left in pain, in soiled bed clothes, denied adequate food and drink, and suffering from repeatedly cancelled operations, missed diagnoses and dismissive staff.

The Patients Association said there are repeated examples they have uncovered of the same appalling standards throughout the NHS.

The charity has disclosed a horrifying catalogue of elderly people left in pain, in soiled bed clothes, denied adequate food and drink, and suffering from repeatedly cancelled operations, missed diagnoses and dismissive staff.

August 16: British Leaders: "Dismantle Nat'l Health Svc., "Fails Expectations," "No Longer Relevant"www.abovetopsecret.com...

August 2: Patients live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for pain management

www.abovetopsecret.com...

July 2: Elderly left at risk by NHS bidding wars to find cheapest care with reverse auctions
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If people are so happy to point to other nations' "public option," why aren't they able to accept the internal criticisms of these very systems?

Is this where we wanyt to be 5 years and $XX trillion later?

I hope not.

jw

reply to post by jdub297


What a coincidence that there is a rash of NHS bashing in the press just as Obama discusses healthcare.


As many brits have commented, the NHS on the whole is brilliant we simply don't have to worry about becoming ill and needing hospital treatment.

Ok we may be unfortunate to have a bad encounter with a hospital we may have to wait a while for treatment, but in the majority of cases we don't have to start selling our cars or kidneys before we even see a surgeon.


I have this feeling that the current NHS bashing is not only designed to make the government look bad but is also intended to send the wrong message to US citizens .


It is one thing to keep a surgeon in fast cars and large houses, but to give an insurer the same just for introducing you to the surgeon is pretty sick.


It would not surprise me in the least if the big insurance companies are behind a lot of the BS claimed about the NHS.

reply to post by moocowman


First, if you took the time to read the subject articles, you would see the speciousness of your reply. They come from different British media sources, and members of the British government!

Hardly an anti-Obama group, or even related to any American insurers.

Do you even think before you post?

These are the recipients of NHS care, the representatives of NHS patients, and the elected representatives of British citizens speaking out.

Personally, except for the NHS being used as an example of "effective government intervention" into private relationships, I really don't care what the NHS does or how much it costs you to keep it alive. Just keep it on your side of the pond, OK?

I only post these links to allow Americans who can read and think for themselves to find what is being said about government-run and government-mandated healthcare overseas.

Deny ignorance.

jw

Lived with completely free healthcare my entire life. Not one person I have ever known has been denied treatment that would have saved their life. Not once has a person had to endure any form of debt what soever due to a hospital visit or stay.

With that aside. I wouldn't trust the American Government walking my dog, leta lone providing my health care. But...

You guys realize that no matter how many 'horror' stories you can dig up, there are exponentially more happening in the US. And not only are they happening where people are being killed by insurance death panels, but they're being drained of every dollar before hand.

60 million people will lost everything should they become ill.

Tens of millions more will become ill, then the insurance company will remove their coverage based on an "unknown, pre-existing condition".

To scrape up some horror stories of a free health care system does nothing to illustrate the issues, it just proves that you've succumb to the mainstream propaganda related to health care. Drive up to Canada and walk down the street, talk to 100 or 1000 people, then repeat that in the states. See who enjoys there health care more, and then ask them how much it costs. I'll do some work for you, if you ask 1 or 10000 people in Canada the costs they incur, the answer will always be zero. So half your job is already done.

reply to post by king9072
I applaud your defense of your own health care system.

I would do so too, if we had one I approved of. We don't.

Sadly, you lose much credibility as an advocate for Canadian health care by parroting empty and false "numbers" used to criticize American health care.

60 million people will lost everything should they become ill.

This reference to personal bankruptcies is so empty as to be more a criticism of its advocates than an indictment of the cost of care. Including such "causes" as "death of a breadwinner," or "loss of employment (and, frequently, employer-funded coverage)" as "healthcare-related" causes of bankruptcy make the figures ridiculous.

Tens of millions more will become ill, then the insurance company will remove their coverage based on an "unknown, pre-existing condition".

What in the world is an "unknown, pre-existing condition?" I am thoroughly familiar with many types of insurance exclusions for pre-existing or non-disclosed conditions. There is no such thing as you referred to. Please do not pontificate about things of which you have no knowledge.

I spend a great portion of my time helping people beat the government AND insurance companies who take advantage of the ill and disabled. I am no fan of either. In my experience, the people who take control of THEIR OWN healthcare, do far better than those trusting others to make those decisions for them!

To scrape up some horror stories of a free health care system does nothing to illustrate the issues, it just proves that you've succumb to the mainstream propaganda related to health care.

Relating what is reported by private charities, medical associations, and government representatives is hardly "scraping up" and definitely not "propaganda." As far as the programs criticized, and which you claim are so generally beloved and endorsed, are concerned, how could that be called "mainstream?" Others on ATS criticize them for being the exact opposite - a 'fringe' movement.

if you ask 1 or 10000 people in Canada the costs they incur, the answer will always be zero.

Really? Does that take into consideration the money that never reaches your pocket because it is taxed away? Does that explain the lack of doctors and nurses because of inadequate compensation? Or the tens of thousands of foreign workers leaving Britain to avoid taxes and fees that make work and life there too expensive to justify?

Link:www.bloomberg.com...

Please, stick to praising the Canadian government, and leave the real criticism of American health care to those who live with it and know what they are talking about.

Deny ignorance.

jw

reply to post by jdub297


Sigh, thats what I get for not rereading my post. My statements were that 60 million people don't have insurance, so if they do get sick its cash out of pocket every single time. AKA Bankruptcy for most.

Further, what I meant by an "unknown, pre-existing condition" ... was that at the time they secured their policy they had some disease or ailment that was not disclosed to the insurance company. Sometimes it's not even that the client doesn't disclose, they literally just didn't know.

So when they need coverage, they go through a battery of tests if the insurance company can find anything pre-existing that WASN'T disclosed, they pull all your coverage. This has happened to millions. People who believed, that since they were insured, they were covered.

What one must understand when reading any post I make about health care is that I don't really care about the American system. Because if I was American, I wouldn't know which way I wanted this whole thing to go either. Considering how corrupt the government is, why would I want them doing something new.

I am simply stating the experience of me and every person I know over my lifetime. When I was a child we went to Disneyland and my grandma fell ill, and was hospitalized in California. By the time we went home 2 weeks later she had almost half a million in health care bills. If we were an American family, without proper insurance this would have been bankruptcy for my ENTIRE family no debates.

So when I say it ends in bankrupcty for a lot of people I don't mean cause the breadwinner died, I mean the amount owed is too much for the entire families savings. AKA Bankrupt. All I know is that in my entire life I have had experiences with healthcare and never once has anyone not received the treatment they needed or had to fork out cash to get it.

To say that Canadians pay some kind of crazy tax rate isn't true either, we hardly pay any more than Americans. France pays the highest, but as a result they likely have the best coverage on earth.

[edit on 28-8-2009 by king9072]

reply to post by jdub297

I only post these links to allow Americans who can read and think for themselves to find what is being said about government-run and government-mandated healthcare overseas.

Yes, and what is being said is but a fragment of the bigger picture,.
You seem to be slightly defensive in your response, I'm just putting across another side of a very complex story.

Simply put, if me or any of my family or friends get sick the last thing on our minds is where are we going to find the money to see a doctor, or will the insurance company actually pay up for my treatment.


This is what the founder (Aneurin Bevan) of the NHS had to say in relation to the concerns of some --

The National Health service and the Welfare State have come to be used as interchangeable terms, and in the mouths of some people as terms of reproach.

Why this is so it is not difficult to understand, if you view everything from the angle of a strictly individualistic competitive society. A free health service is pure Socialism and as such it is opposed to the hedonism of capitalist society

I struggle to come to terms with probably the most religious (probably chrsitian) nation on earth being pertified of sharing the wealth and the health.


I'm not trying to claim the NHS should be a model for other peoples healthcare, but I'd sooner pay into it that line the pockets of Insurers which would appear on the face of it not to be a good working model.


Needless to say this is a very complex and emotionally charged topic, perhaps we should take care not to misconstrue the intent of each others comments.

Have a nice day.

reply to post by moocowman


I am not defensive about my postition at all. It is well founded and well laid-out.

When you interject suspicions of "a coincidence" and how "I feel" or "I suspect," or how things "seem," then you have left the realm of objective dialectic and entered into the realm of opinion, which is personal and needs no basis in fact, by definition.

When I relate what others have said, I do so objectively. If facts betray your suspicions or feelings, I will point that out.

There is no evidence that the sources of the subject articles (all British) have any stake in the defeat of Obamacare, or any other flavor of American health care reform. Nor is there any evidence that any American health insurers have influenced the positions taken by the articles' subjects, or the British press reporting them.

They are newsworthy in their own right, regardless of what is happening in the United States, or anywhere else for that matter.

As for my own feelings, I have been abundantly clear:

people who take control of THEIR OWN healthcare, do far better than those trusting others to make those decisions for them!

.

This opinion is based on first-hand experience, research and analysis.

I have yet to be shown otherwise.

jw

While the NHS, as well as the Canadian health care system, as well as every other country on earth that provides universal health care treatment might not be perfect, it doesn't appear as though the US system is without its faults:

Doctors:
A. The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
B. Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year are 120,000.
C. Accidental deaths per physician is just over 17%


Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health Human Services.

This thread was posted about a week or so ago here on ATS by a firearm advocate. He was alluding to the fact that there were many many times the number of errors that resulted in death in the US health care system than there were people killed by firearms in the USA.

Just goes to show that you should probably look in your own backyard before condemning others.

Despite the recent rash of UK health system-bashing, it still suprises me that the people attempting to frighten Americans by bashing the UK national care health system, facts still point to the UK system being healthier for their citizens than that of the corporate-controlled US system.

2007 statistics:

UK: 5 infant deaths per 1000 births.
US: 6.4 infant deaths per 1000 births.

UK: Life expectancy, 78.7 years.
US: Life expectancy, 78 years.

So, if you live in the UK, even with their "terrible" health system, you have a better chance of surviving your birth, and yoou live longer than you would if you live in the US.

I have posted these TRUE FACTS on each UK-System bashing thread I can find, since the FACTS are conveniently not included when trying to scare Americans away from any sort of national health care "option".

I hate when people use FEAR and SMEAR to coerse others into agreement with a flawed argument.


[edit on 28-8-2009 by uaocteaou]

reply to post by astrij


I do not know anything about those numbers or their validity. I do not care to look, really.

I am NOT advocating the American system. If you've read any of my posts, you'd know I despise it.

Nor am I "condemning" anyone else's.

Whem the Canadian, European and UK systems are offered as examples of what MY healthcare should be, I WANT to know what criticisms there are of them.

Don't you ever read "reviews" about books, movies, cars, TVs, and other purchases or investments you make?

Or do you just blindly accept what's given you by someone else?

I do not.

deny ignorance

jw

reply to post by uaocteaou


Actually, what you post are not "facts." Even if they were, they are so outdated as to be meaningless.

"Births" and "life-expectancy" are measured differently in different places and for differing purposes, and your source is notoriously biased.

Your posts everywhere on this add nothing to any debate except as to your credulity.

jw

reply to post by jdub297


What...???? 2007 is not "outdated" and the statistics are NOT calculated "differently" in otger places.

deaths per 1000 birth mean just that.
Life expectancy means just that.

sorry, but it's true.

Originally posted by jdub297

'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed

www.telegraph.co.uk...

I despise our insurance-dependent system. I do not want a third party coming between me and my health care provider. I don't want insurance calling the shots. I don't want government doing so even more.

I know, millions of Britons are perfectly happy with a "public option."

But when the horror stories begin flowing out like water, from independent and unbiased sources, isn't it a sign that something might be wrong?

One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today.

This is just the latest in what seems to amount to a series of disclosures of the inadequacies, and unbearable expense of, a government-controlled health care system.

In the last six years, the Patients Association claims hundreds of thousands have suffered from poor standards of nursing, often with 'neglectful, demeaning, painful and sometimes downright cruel' treatment.

The charity has disclosed a horrifying catalogue of elderly people left in pain, in soiled bed clothes, denied adequate food and drink, and suffering from repeatedly cancelled operations, missed diagnoses and dismissive staff.

The Patients Association said there are repeated examples they have uncovered of the same appalling standards throughout the NHS.

The charity has disclosed a horrifying catalogue of elderly people left in pain, in soiled bed clothes, denied adequate food and drink, and suffering from repeatedly cancelled operations, missed diagnoses and dismissive staff.

August 16: British Leaders: "Dismantle Nat'l Health Svc., "Fails Expectations," "No Longer Relevant"www.abovetopsecret.com...

August 2: Patients live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for pain management

www.abovetopsecret.com...

July 2: Elderly left at risk by NHS bidding wars to find cheapest care with reverse auctions
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If people are so happy to point to other nations' "public option," why aren't they able to accept the internal criticisms of these very systems?

Is this where we wanyt to be 5 years and $XX trillion later?

I hope not.

jw

What it does indicate though, is that NHS has a system in place to track and report the instances of inadequate and abusive care of the elderly.

Here is an entire paper outlining the difficulties with obtaining accurate data here in the US and a means to rectify the problem:

The Availability and Utility
of Interdisciplinary Data on Elder Abuse:
A White Paper for the
National Center on Elder Abuse

www.ncea.aoa.gov...

Originally posted by king9072
reply to post by jdub297

 

Sigh, thats what I get for not rereading my post. My statements were that 60 million people don't have insurance, so if they do get sick its cash out of pocket every single time. AKA Bankruptcy for most.

Further, what I meant by an "unknown, pre-existing condition" ... was that at the time they secured their policy they had some disease or ailment that was not disclosed to the insurance company. Sometimes it's not even that the client doesn't disclose, they literally just didn't know.

So when they need coverage, they go through a battery of tests if the insurance company can find anything pre-existing that WASN'T disclosed, they pull all your coverage. This has happened to millions. People who believed, that since they were insured, they were covered.

60 million don't have insurance? I've read 45, 47 and even 50 million.
You've found 10 million more, all by yourself?

All are WRONG. Refuted many times, many places.

Here's what NPR, (the definition of liberal media in the US) says:

The number of uninsured comes from 2007 Census Bureau estimates.

Some 40 percent of the uninsured are between the ages of 19 and 29.
Many of these young people don't buy insurance because they are healthy and don't want to. Young adults, ages 19 to 29, have the highest uninsured rate (30 percent) of any age group. (Most are healthy and do not believe they need insurance - students are frequently covered while enrolled in school and do not generally buy insurance plans of their own.)

A few million of the "uninsured" are likely enrolled in Medicaid but tell the Census that they are uninsured because they don't have private insurance — the so-called Medicaid undercount.

Also, almost one in five of the uninsured are not citizens of the United States.

Another challenge is getting people who are already eligible for existing federal health plans like Medicaid and the state Children's Health Insurance Program to sign up.

Of the estimated 46 million uninsured people living in the United States, about one-quarter of them are eligible for these programs but not enrolled.

"46 million uninsured:" A Look Behind the Number
www.npr.org...

Throw in the millions of working families, or retired workers who do not want to pay insurance premiums, but would rather "pay as you go," relying on longstanding relationships with providers or neighborhood medical clinincs for primary care, and the "46 million" evaporates.

As for pre-existing conditions, the are excluded ONLY if you knew of them AND received treatment for them prior to applying for the subject coverage. These exclusions are regulated by the individual States, and are STRICTLY ENFORCED AGAINST THE CARRIER, in any case of ambiguity.

They serve a legitimate purpose; excluding people who buy insurance AFTER they know they are seriously ill. It happens. It is fraud

And, the carriers are not going to pay for a "battery of tests" on some fishing expedition. If you believe they will spend their money this way, you are misinformed, or just not thinking. What they WILL spend their mony on is a complete search and review of all prior records to identify what WAS pre-existing AND treated!

Instead of re-reading before you post, you should check your sources as well.


jw

[edit on 28-8-2009 by jdub297]