Bonneville America Forums Forums Off Topic Discussion Forums Lounge Health Care / U.K. & Canada Style ?

OK ! This IS the lounge so, let me ask a question of my brothers in the wind from the U.K. and Canada. What is YOUR opinion of a socialized health care system and what is your personal experience of how it is working in your country ? Any personal stories ? ..... this may be coming state side and I'd like some honest feedback from folks with some 1st hand knowledge .

Quote:

---

What is YOUR opinion of a socialized health care system and what is your personal experience

---

I am all for the National Health Service as we know it here, We do pay alot of taxes, and taxes on taxes here and in my opinion there are two meny managers and not enough Doctors and Nurses or beds. However my son was recently in quite a serious accident and required one emergency and two further cosmetic operations. The service and treatment he got was second to none.

Had a relative over from Canada a few years ago, slipped and gashed his hand on a wall, went to the local medical center and they stiched him up and gave him some tablets, on informing them he was not a resident they said no mater, the charge is 350, he thought they ment £350, it was £3.50. he was quite impressed as well.

Up till this time my back was bad I'd have stood up for the NHS.

However in January I travelled 2 hours by bus to see what I thought was a back specialist. He turn out to be a consultant physiotherapist, who told me I shouldn't be using crutches (how else was I supposed to get there... I couldn't walk without them) and pain relief (that wasn't really working) and physiotherapy were the way to continue (ie I was wasting his time.... )

I had a private appointment with a physiotherapist - paid for by work - after seeing the other one, and he was expecting to see me having been operated on... I hadn't. He then recommended steroid injections directly in to my spine.... something that wasn't even suggested at the hospital. I had them done at the same private hospital that Richard Hammond went to after he tried to kill himself in the jet car.... 8 days later I was back on my bike!!!!

I guess what I'm trying to say is there are good parts to the NHS and bad bits. I just found a bad bit, and was lucky I had work (in specific a very good local manager...) to back me up in going private.

I'm sure some of the NHS workers on here will pipe up.

Oh boy, here we go again. This discussion happened a year and a half ago around here? It eventually got locked so just keep that in mind.

Bottom line;
1. Higher taxes
2. Everyone is taken care of to a point.
3. Health Care plans are still available.
4. No such thing as a "Canada" plan. Each province is different.

When chatting with some canuckian friends a few years ago in Nelson, it sounded like big, life threatening things were taken care quickly and efficiently but small routine things could take a while. Which kinda makes sense, since life threatening conditions should have higher priority.

In Australia,I'm on three different pills a day as I've had a triple by-pass. I've got a right leg that's had 5 operations due to a car driver who plowed me off my 1971 Triumph Tiger[back in 1971].If it wasn't for "Medicare" our National health service.I'd probably still be trying to pay off the cost of all that,or dead as I couldn't afford it in the first place.
But as in Canada,each state looks after their own health system and that's not working here.The states are wrecking the system[most state governments here would have trouble organizing a raffle] and health care should be done on a national level IMO.Sorry you did ask about U.K.,Canada not Aust.but we've got the same system so I hope I wasn't

Oh no,,,I just failed to add my brothers to the South in the my inquiry

I just didn't want to butt in if you were only looking for answers from U.K/Canada

Hmmm.... The term 'socialized health care system' is kinda vague. But, we already have examples of two kinds of health care in the US that fall into that vague category. We have

1. Government run health care (the V.A.). In this system, the doctors, the pharmacies, the hospitals, everybody is employed by the government. Having experienced this system, I can say it's got its ups and downs. The plus side is that ANYBODY who needs care gets it. The down side is that it's part of the national budget, so funds can be cut on a politician's whim. When I was between jobs, I had to go to the V.A. for a couple of things. I didn't find it any worse than any other hospital. It should be noted that NOBODY (not Obama or even Hillary) has suggested going to this system nationally.

2. Single-payer health care (Medicare). Under this system, the government acts as your insurance company. Having not experienced this system, I can't speak from experience. This is what is being suggested by the Obama administration as an alternative to private healthcare. Under their plan, the private insurance companies would be able to compete with the government for customers. If the private companies really do provide better service (as they claim), they would not lose business. This would also provide an option for those who can't afford private health care.

Just my observation.