Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Typical tory scum at its worst: NHS Direct to be scrapped

... and replaced by a piss-poor cheapstake alternative

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/27/nhs-direct-health-phone-service?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

If this comes to be, I hope is the final eye opener to anyone who ever doubted that the Tories only ever care about looking after their own- and fuck everyone else.

It'll be an absolute disgrace if this happens. And don't let any tory cunt tell you we can't afford to keep it, or that the cheap shit alternative proposed will be an adequate replacement.

Fucking tory bastards (and fucking lib dem usless shites, while we're at it) :mad:
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«1

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If I remember correctly from what a friends wife told me, some days she would be one of only a small handful of people actually taking calls for NHS in the north east.

    What did we do before NHS direct, I know its made a lot of difference for many people, however was it such a failure that NHS direct only came in when it did.

    There is so much that needs to be cut, and no matter what it is there is always going to be people ready to jump to the defence of whatever it is. Even though the NHS budget is going to rise, to make sure they can adequately care for an ageing population within the budget.

    If it had to be cut, would you prefer it stays, or the £100+ million it costs to run go towards giving medical care rather than medical advice [as good as it may be]

    I do feel a bit of sympathy for this government, I know they have to cut a lot of stuff that labour specifically brought in that made labour look good. Now the tories have to take the brunt of the abuse.

    We could go onto have an argument about what thing to cut instead, and then the thing instead of that, and end up in a massive circular argument.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This looks to me like the sort of deceitful spinning that The Guardian is often keen to accuse the popular newspapers of engaging in. They say the new solution will be cheaper. I, for one, don't believe it for a second. There will inevitably be so many cock-ups that the new system will actually cost MORE money in the end.

    I say leave the system as it is.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    For once a government is actually advocating a simpler system, rather than having a sing and dance about a more complex system designed to save money, but never does.

    Will be interesting to see how it turns out though. What happens if it ends up costing the same, but providing more capacity and help?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I've been reading a book recently which is written by a doctor in A+E. There is a section on NHS Direct, and I thought I'd quickly summarise what he says about the service, as I think its a good insight for this discussion.

    -He says it is good at providing non-urgent advice.
    -However in emergencies it is not so good for 3 reasons:
    1) It takes a long time to get through.
    2) The patients aren't actually seen.
    3) Treatments and advice are very protocol driven. (They have to err on the side of caution, and combined with not being able to see patients it often leads to inappropriately advising patients to go to A&E.)

    -This doctor goes on to say that whilst he thinks NHS Direct has its uses, he thinks there may be more efficient and safer ways to help patients. The options he mentions are:
    1) More triage nurses in A&E to give out advice (they can see the patient infront of them)
    2) Easier access to out of hours GPs


    I'm unsure about my views on NHS Direct. However I don't think that it necessarily would be "an absolute disgrace" if it went.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Worth checking a few facts first.

    1. We've been working on the 111 number approach for over a year. i.e. before the election. So let's not blame the Tories for this.

    2. Over 70% of people calling NHS Direct get advice and referred to their GP as non urgent case. Therefore the "more nurses in A&E" is not an good idea, these patients aren't travelling - ditto "more out of hours".

    3. The A&E doctor mentioned above is quite correct when he suggests that NHS Direct isn't any good in an emergency. That might just be because it's not designed for that. 999 is.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Thing is, NHS Direct is not meant for emergencies and should not be used for them.

    But it provides a great service to millions for non- emergency enquiries. And it's just textbook Tory behaviour to replace it with lowest common denominator garbage.

    Disgraceful.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    from personal experience nhs direct was so calming to me at a really distressing time. i had self-harmed quite deeply and was put through to a empathetic and considerate nurse who talked to me about how i was feeling and asked questions to judge whether i needed to go to hospital and then told me how to bandage it. it really was of immense support to me during that horrible night. i'd hate to think it wouldnt be around in future for anyone else.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    And it's just textbook Tory behaviour to replace it with lowest common denominator garbage.

    Disgraceful.

    Hmm
    MoK wrote: »

    1. We've been working on the 111 number approach for over a year. i.e. before the election. So let's not blame the Tories for this.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    from personal experience nhs direct was so calming to me at a really distressing time. i had self-harmed quite deeply and was put through to a empathetic and considerate nurse who talked to me about how i was feeling and asked questions to judge whether i needed to go to hospital and then told me how to bandage it. it really was of immense support to me during that horrible night. i'd hate to think it wouldnt be around in future for anyone else.

    Wouldnt a GP out of hours do the same kind of thing?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Any excuse to Tory-bash I guess...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What did people do before NHS direct then?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    Wouldnt a GP out of hours do the same kind of thing?

    I wasn't really in the right frame of mind to go to an out of hours, I didn't want to waste anyone's time. Also it was late at night and I had no transport. Plus I was scared and speaking to someone on the phone was easier in my case.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I quite often call NHS direct, more for reassurance though than for actual medical help, when I get worried about small health problems I may or may not have at the time.

    I hope this 111 thing isn't staffed by foreigners (this isn't designed to be racist, I just mean I hope it's people in England who speak fluent and comprehensible English.)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    What did people do before NHS direct then?

    Usually wait to eventually get to their GP, ring 999, turn up in A&E or try OOH. As I say, none of that is usually needed.
    I wasn't really in the right frame of mind to go to an out of hours, I didn't want to waste anyone's time. Also it was late at night and I had no transport. Plus I was scared and speaking to someone on the phone was easier in my case.

    111 should still be able to offer this kind of help, but this is why NHS Direct was put in place. Not urgent but not something you would go to GP for either.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    MoK wrote: »
    Usually wait to eventually get to their GP, ring 999, turn up in A&E or try OOH. As I say, none of that is usually needed.



    111 should still be able to offer this kind of help, but this is why NHS Direct was put in place. Not urgent but not something you would go to GP for either.

    I hope so! I was a bit put off by it not being managed by medically trained staff. If the same level of professionalism and sensitivity continues then it's no problem.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Bearing in mind that the Guardian article blames the Tories, how much else do you think is correct in that article?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    hey i like the guardian! but i guess only time will tell.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    All this can't afford nonsense is bollox.
    The banks and investment houses are awash with money as are many billionaires.
    The money supply has been switched off ...the biggest transfer of wealth in history has been taking place the last ten years.
    The wealth didn't vanish ...it got consolidated into fewer hands and we aint getting a sniff of it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    All this can't afford nonsense is bollox.
    The banks and investment houses are awash with money as are many billionaires.
    The money supply has been switched off ...the biggest transfer of wealth in history has been taking place the last ten years.
    The wealth didn't vanish ...it got consolidated into fewer hands and we aint getting a sniff of it.

    Yes but that is private money, UK Plc isnt.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    Yes but that is private money, UK Plc isnt.

    The bankers have trousered as good as a trillion quid of our money!
    A lot of that private money was also our money.
    Study the thirties great depression which is considered by most economists now to be ...the first scientificaly engineeered economic collapse and note the similarities.
    You'll also see some of the same players.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Got links to that?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    Got links to that?

    At this time on fRIDAY NO AND NOT IN THIS CONDITION BUT you can always Google it.
    I'll see hw at I can give you tomorrow.
    Half cut and very tired I 'm afraid.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Enjoy a good bank holiday drink then :)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    1 Trident replacement project = more than 200 years of NHS direct funding.

    Enough said. 111 million quid is, within the frame of the overall budget, fucking peanuts.

    But hey, they'll save a few quid by getting under-trained unqualified tenagers on minimum wage to give advice. Almost certainly the service will go significantly downhill with severe consequences... though don't expect the likes of the Daily Cunting Mail to make it big headline front page news, like they did on the one or two occasions in the many years of service of NHS Direct when that happened.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10285950
    Consideration should be given to scrapping NHS Direct as part of a scaling back of health spending, GPs say at their annual conference.

    That was in June, and that was GP's. So the government perhaps taking advice of health professionals and still getting grief for it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Enough said. 111 million quid is, within the frame of the overall budget, fucking peanuts.

    MP's expenses were also a pittance within the overall budget, and people wanted them cutting. Morally right or wrong, the expenses were essentially fuck all.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10285950



    That was in June, and that was GP's. So the government perhaps taking advice of health professionals and still getting grief for it.

    The answer is within the quote you posted: "as part of a scaling back of health spending".

    There should not be any cuts on health spending. Certainly not on frontline services. There goes the promise by Disco Dave to ringfence the NHS against cuts. There go the claims that the Tories have changed and the NHS is safe in their hands. Quelle fucking surprise.

    Same old Tories. Simple as that. I get the feeling they're really are enjoying this as well. The economic crisis really has been a god-sent gift for the bastards.

    And eternal shame on the Lib Dems for going along with this.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NHS Direct is trending on twitter atm.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Funding isnt going to get cut, but they need to use the money they have to safeguard against the ageing population.

    If labout had culled 50,000 elderly people, they could have saved the NHS thousands, but they havnt.

    Theres the argument that nothing should be cut. At all, from any budget. Then we go down the shitter.

    I love how people complain about government interference in their lives until they need it. Its like slagging off coppers and PCSO's until your house gets robbed, then accusing them of chasing statistics.

    They are talking of cutting 10,000 to 15,000 jobs from the army alone, never mind the RAF and RN. Where else could they cut that many jobs from? Yeah I think theres probly alternatives to Trident.

    However where does the buck stop when it comes to budget cuts, theres always an argument against something.

    If I phrase it a different way, if you HAD to cut this £100m+ from the budget, what would you sacrifice instead of NHS direct?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Same old Tories.
    Laboour said tough on crime and tough on the causes and started banging loads of people up.
    The Tories as usual are going to cut police numbers but at the same time they have also decided to stop putting people in jail and are going to cut the prisons budget.
    More money for the bankers who lets face it ...control your lives and mine.

    Finance controls every human endevour.
Sign In or Register to comment.