Drunk A&E Patients Should Be Charged

shyvas

shyvas

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 5, 2012
Reaction score
42,838
Location
Somewhere in the South
Lifestyle
  1. Other
"
Patients who visit A&E while drunk or under the influence of recreational drugs should pay for the treatment they receive, according to the large majority of people questioned for a Sky News poll.
More than seven in 10 of those questioned said anyone needing emergency medical care because they were intoxicated should be charged for using NHS services.
Experts say at least seven million people a year attend A&E while drunk, placing an enormous strain on health service resources. "

http://news.sky.com/story/1138596/sky-poll-drunk-a-and-e-patients-should-be-charged
 
Phew, it's only a poll, not a real thing. No because:

NHS emergency healthcare should always be free. To everyone.

It penalises people with alcohol / drug abuse problems, who need help - not to be ostracised or made to feel they don't deserve emergency treatment.

It's a slippery slope - if people who are drunk or on drugs don't deserve free health care, do people who are overweight? People who smoke? People who speed? People who play dangerous sports? People who work in potentially risky jobs? Etc.

It'll encourage some people not to use emergency serves that they need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danielle, Amy SF, yally and 3 others
SummerRain said:
Phew, it's only a poll, not a real thing. No because:

NHS emergency healthcare should always be free. To everyone.

It penalises people with alcohol / drug abuse problems, who need help - not to be ostracised or made to feel they don't deserve emergency treatment.

It's a slippery slope - if people who are drunk or on drugs don't deserve free health care, do people who are overweight? People who smoke? People who speed? People who play dangerous sports? People who work in potentially risky jobs? Etc.

It'll encourage some people not to use emergency serves that they need.
Click to expand...

Exactly this. Denying treatment based on finances isn't the solution; tackle the issue at the source.

Also, charging for it will only negatively affect the poor - well-off people aren't going to care much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amy SF and KLS52
I just saw a coverage showing how difficult it is for paramedics to deal with emergency calls on Saturday nights from people that are drunk. They diall 999 and dissapear whilst the paramedics are searching for them and having to deal with new emergency calls.
The drunk youngsters didn't look poor and where dressed with all the latest gear.

Apparently it costs the NH between £300 - 500 to pick up someone who is drunk and most of the time they just sleep it off for 2 hours at hospital.

People that are in real need of emergency services may be in danger as the paramedics are on a wild goose chase after all the drunks.
 
Awful idea, for the reasons AeryFairy and SummerRain posted. Also, it could lead to people not going to hospital which could prove deadly depending on what was wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amy SF
Speaking as a citizen/resident of the US, where a hospital stay will include a charge of $100 for a SINGLE pill and where people die because they can't afford basic healthcare, charging for healthcare that is supposed to be free IMO sets a dangerous precedent. Like SR says, it's a slippery slope. If one group of people is charged, than what's stop the NHS from charging another group of people, and so on? If there are those in the UK who would like to get rid of the NHS and replace it with the type of for-profit healthcare we have here in the US, then they'd see this as an opening. Residents of the UK deserve to have free healthcare. Keep it free!
 
  • Like
Reactions: yally
Amy SF said:
Speaking as a citizen/resident of the US, where a hospital stay will include a charge of $100 for a SINGLE pill and where people die because they can't afford basic healthcare, charging for healthcare that is supposed to be free IMO sets a dangerous precedent. Like SR says, it's a slippery slope. If one group of people is charged, than what's stop the NHS from charging another group of people, and so on? If there are those in the UK who would like to get rid of the NHS and replace it with the type of for-profit healthcare we have here in the US, then they'd see this as an opening. Residents of the UK deserve to have free healthcare. Keep it free![/quote]
Click to expand...

It isn't free and the taxpayers pay for the NHS. Drastic mesures have to be taken to ensure that European NHS is available to all as there is a major crisis.

If you read the link it states that certain people are misuing it.

"It's not there for people who have just been mucking around and drinking too much. So we need to think of a way of creating a disincentive for people to get drunk and go to A&E, and we think one of the ways is that people should be invoiced for that use of A&E."
 
Nobody is denying that some drunk people misuse the NHS services, but I'd rather tackle the problem at the cause - Brits dysfunctional relationship with alcohol - than undermine the principle of the NHS and IMO cause more problems by charging for NHS services - including those already mentioned. There are also lots of other ways you could prevent people from misusing NHS services, such as increasing awareness/advertising, that don't involve charging people for medical treatment.

There are some people that would love the break up the NHS, chip by chip, starting with measures like this - measures that gain public approval because there are some topics the public and newspapers love: people wasting "our taxes" because they're drunk or benefits cheats, immigration, Brits out of work, etc. I don't want to see the NHS undermined like this, because I believe everyone should have free health care - even if they're drunk, even if they're in some way responsible for their illness, even if they don't have any money, etc.

Besides, things like this get lots of media attention, but it's disproportionate. I'm not saying money isn't wasted due to drunk teenagers - it definitely is - but if £7 million is spent on people attending A&E whilst drunk, £4 million of NHS money a year is spent on homeopathy (a "treatment" scientifically proven to be nothing more than a placebo). But one you hear about all the time on TV and in the newspapers, the next is virtually unheard of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Freesia, Second Summer, AeryFairy and 1 other person
Echo everyone who has already said what a terrible idea this is.

Also, while we could do plenty to educate people to only use A and E in an emergency, do we really want people to avoid getting treatment for something potentially life threatening because they can't afford it?
 
Top Bottom