cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Oh sweet! They've rembered me

Luzern
Pro
Posts: 2,836
Thanks: 219
Fixes: 2
Registered: 31-07-2007

Oh sweet! They've rembered me

Who says the NHS is bad? For a few seconds, wen the hospital phoned me, I thought the missus' angiogram, thats due next week had been postponed, oh dear. 

Not so; it was to  give me a date for a gastroscopy, diarised from a year ago when I had a both ways oscopy and CT scan, to see if any changes have occurred.

No bad marks from me for local NHS treatment.

No one has to agree with my opinion, but in the time I have left a miracle would be nice.
4 REPLIES
Minivanman
Hero
Posts: 4,794
Thanks: 1,046
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-11-2014

Re: Oh sweet! They've rembered me

A bit of a curate's egg if you ask me. The system works well once you are in the loop, the problem is getting into it in the first place as that can takes quite some time. GP referrals for that first hospital appointment down my way usually take around six months. I missed one appointment through no fault of my own and am now having to wait those six months for another one. As for that first GP appointment well that's another story, and another wait!

All views expressed are my own but you can express them too if you want to be right about everything like I am.
Community Veteran
Posts: 7,914
Thanks: 594
Fixes: 8
Registered: 02-08-2007

Re: Oh sweet! They've rembered me

I agree, the NHS is a mixed bag of tricks (and treats)

swmbo had a hip replacement and when attending the review with the  consultant told him she had developed a pain going down the back of her leg, after examining her he said the operation was a total success, which it was as she has no pain when walking and he suggested that the pain was related to some nerve damage and she needed to be seen by the pain clinic however he could not refer her direct even though it was the same hospital so he would have to write to her GP suggesting the referral, it took nearly 3 weeks before the GP got that referral letter and then another 4 weeks before the hospital got that letter and then a 4 week wait before the actual appointment date.

Just what you want when in pain !

Community Veteran
Posts: 13,921
Thanks: 514
Fixes: 7
Registered: 01-08-2007

Re: Oh sweet! They've rembered me


Minivanman wrote:

The system works well once you are in the loop, the problem is getting into it in the first place


and getting back out of it Lips are sealed

I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Luzern
Pro
Posts: 2,836
Thanks: 219
Fixes: 2
Registered: 31-07-2007

Re: Oh sweet! They've rembered me

My personal view of any large organisation is that in the end the treatment meted out to its clients depends on those giving and those receiving. Hospitals, whatever, people are doing things or having things done. Recently the Royal Sussex at BRighton has been placed in Special Measures, but will that do much long term. Its previous reputation from what was on the news hasn't been good before. The same appied to my previous area. My anaemia turned to early Ca.because my GP just kept giving me iron, until his junior colleague acted in his absence and referred me for a colonoscopy, and the specialist fast tracked me to the surgeon rather than back to GP, Worse still at various other hospitalizations occult blood had been found but ignored. Are hospitals like that likely to get and retain the best staff?

Same applies in all walks; is a CV mentioning whareever a boon or hindrance.

The other thing too often overlooked is money, Unless paid for no service can succeed. Unless folk are willing to work no service can succeed. 

Copied from a blog my wife receives.

A problem of life expectancy

You may have missed the NHS’s 68th birthday last month.

It was a quiet affair.

Perhaps nobody felt much like celebrating after a horrible year which saw the junior doctors’ dispute, GP shortages, demoralised nurses, embattled managers, failing hospitals, missed targets, rows about staffing and safety, inspections, investigations and – as a consequence of all the above – more reviews, plans and initiatives than ever.

The hope of more money for the NHS was briefly plastered on the side of a bus. But the bus left and its jolly driver gave up buses and got a job abroad. The ever-depleting NHS coffers are earmarked for vulnerability, resilience, sustainability and support. Transformation, the bright side of this gloomy remedial treatment plan, looks increasingly wistful and irony-laden. 

The NHS finds itself like many a 68 year-old facing an uncertain future. What little money it has is all going on repairs, insurance policies that may not pay out, servicing debts and bailing out spendthrift relatives.  

This is the matriarch who has spent a lifetime looking after others but now suddenly finds her own health failing.

Her dependants have come to rely on her ability to weather a crisis, to bounce back. She wouldn’t abandon us now. It’s unthinkable.

We live in an age of unthinkables: Brexit, Isis and Trump to name a few. A terminal NHS crisis is very thinkable.

The centre's obsession with financial balance provides a convenient cover for the fact that the current account is the least of our worries.

As Chris Hopson, the chief executive of NHS Providers, reminded us last week, the number of people living beyond 85 years will more than double by 2035.

The older population – that’s some of us now, all of us in future – accounts for two-thirds of spending in health and adult social care. Demand is soaring and funding is not keeping up.

The government says there is no more money. Leading health economists agree with Chris Hopson that there is not enough money. They may well both be right, but somebody has to be righter.

Transformation is the name of the eventual NHS in which there are fewer big buildings, more local services, better organised professional networks, cleverer IT, healthier people less likely to become ill and better able to care for themselves when they do, no corner shop general practices, a focus on people not conditions or institutions, personalised medicines, an end to third-class mental health care, and generous social care for the centenarian victims of our ever-increasing medical success.

The idea that changes of this magnitude can be squeezed out of either back-office costs or the pay bill is delusional. Shared services are often worse and end up costing more than the services they replace. Cutting staff costs has risks that don't need spelling out. 

Meanwhile the ageing population, obesity, mental health, broken social care and other pressures on the system are not going to wait patiently while we decide what we can afford.

If the answer is still no more money, then the question is: how much less NHS do you want?

No one has to agree with my opinion, but in the time I have left a miracle would be nice.