OT...Don’t get sick or old,

Amazon warrior

New member
One thing hit me on reading that headline. \"Don\'t treat the old and unhealthy\"

Fair enough, sting those who willfully mistreat their bodies. But the elderly? *Everybody* gets old, and frankly, they might not think this now, but when you dribble and need someone to get you in and out of bed and wipe your ar*e, investing in care for the elderly suddenly becomes a real priority.

My mum is a nurse, and was the matron of a nursing and residential home before she retired. I helped out enough there to know how tough the job is and just how tight a budget they have to work with. And this was a well-run home. You hear some absolute horror stories, not just from care homes, but also from hospital wards dealing with the elderly. And with people living longer and longer (as others have already pointed out), this problem is going to get bigger, not smaller. Invest in care for the elderly, dammit! In 30-40 years time, you\'ll be really grateful you did.

On the subject of care for the downright unhealthy, well, I guess I\'ve seen that coin too. My dad was a chronic smoker and alcoholic, with all the issues that those addictions bring. He died almost three years ago after a failed lung transplant. Under this regime, would he have merited that operation? His state of health was such that he might not have lived many more years anyway. In a dark, unpleasant corner of my heart, I know what he was like and I\'m not sure he would have stopped smoking even if the operation had been a success, but at the same time that sort of means that I\'m not sure if he merited the operation. And that\'s a horrible thought to have about your parent. :(
 

airhead

Coffin Dodger / Keymaster
Originally posted by Amazon warrior
One thing hit me on reading that headline. \"Don\'t treat the old and unhealthy\"
Who decides what\'s old? 80 this week. Oh, money is tight, cut the limit down to 70. Money still tight. Quit treating anyone over 50 - they\'ve lived a full life and are about to become a burden.

Don\'t treat the unhealthy? :eek: Yea, the hospitals are full of well people.....You get sick, you are on your own. Get over that appendicitis all by yourself. Do you hear what you are saying? You are going to put some bureaucrat in charge of your health care? Oh, wait. Those with socialized medicine already have...same with HMO\'s over here...(oh snap).


Amazon, this is not aimed at you, but at the quote you quoted. After I read it, it looked like I might have been picking on you.
 

Amazon warrior

New member
Originally posted by airhead
...You are going to put some bureaucrat in charge of your health care? Oh, wait. Those with socialized medicine already have...same with HMO\'s over here...(oh snap).

I think the bureaucrats have been in charge for a long time already... :(

Originally posted by airheadAmazon, this is not aimed at you, but at the quote you quoted. After I read it, it looked like I might have been picking on you.

S\'ok. I figured as much! And you\'re absolutely right. It often seems like all they do is move the goal posts so it looks like they\'re succeeding, but in fact all they\'ve done is alter the definition of \"failure\"...
 

DrEvilmonki

Active member
Originally posted by airhead
You are going to put some bureaucrat in charge of your health care? Oh, wait. Those with socialized medicine already have...same with HMO\'s over here...(oh snap).

Actually it\'s a no win situation because if you don\'t have bureaucrats running it then you have business people running it for the benefit of their shareholders. It maybe be financially better off (and even then it\'s a big maybe) but I wouldn\'t hold your breath on levels of quality improving.
 

Mr.S.Marbo

New member
Originally posted by DrEvilmonki Actually it\'s a no win situation because if you don\'t have bureaucrats running it then you have business people running it for the benefit of their shareholders. It maybe be financially better off (and even then it\'s a big maybe) but I wouldn\'t hold your breath on levels of quality improving.

Totally agree...

Perhaps this is where tons of NHS money goes - targets and silly measures designed to \"cut costs\".

From a GP\'s blog:

\"A housebound patient phoned me to say that the toilet in her home is broken and cannot be used for two days. The County Equipment services can supply her with a commode but only if they have a letter from her GP. And the same from social services. They will provide a commode but also want a letter from a GP

Am I now part of the emergency plumbing service?

Dear Comrades

Would you kindly supply Mrs Jones with a commode

Yours sincerely

Dictated, typed, signed, put in envelope, stamped and posted. OK, trivial event in itself, but what is this all about? I am not a plumber. Is there is an illicit trade in commodes? Are they being abused?\"

Some bright spark probably thought they could save money by making sure things like this are not given out to people that don\'t really need it... but I mean come on really... the cost of this approval process for something so simple.

I don\'t think this is unique to the public sector either, I have seen it just as bad in the private sector.
 
Back To Top
Top