Other funding issues relate to the effect on practices like mine with a
mixture of social class and demand for healthcare. If a lot of our
wealthier, middle-class patients decamped to the nice quiet posh
practice down the road it would seriously undermine our ability to care
for the needy.
Visiting is less of an issue now that home visits are becoming less
common, but I agree boundaries for these would need to be retained. I
heard a suggestion today that in a few years they could be done by
paramedics with additional training, reporting back to the patient's GP
by 'phone.
Typical healthy, middle-aged, middle-class grey-suited politicians
reinventing the NHS to suit themselves.
On 17/09/09 18:17, Russell Brown wrote:
> It isn't just the home visits. The wider funding issues haven't been mentioned.
>
> Social services and district nursing both have discrete geographical
> areas. That will have to change. PCTs have to fund secondary care
> provision. Which PCT will pay for a patient who works in London but
> lives in Eastbourne who is registered in London and elects to go for a
> hernia repair near where he lives. Who will then Fund his post-op
> care? And as John says, who will visit him at home if he is ill?
> On Thursday, September 17, 2009, Gavin Jamie
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> John Glasspool wrote:
>>> Ignoring the hysteria thisis bound to unleash in some medical circles;
>>> has anyone seen what is ACTUALLY proposed yet? As ever, I have a
>>> feeling that whatever it is, it won't work out as intended adn, just
>>> like the NHS IT programme, will be costly, and inefficient.
>>>
>> It is to be implemented in a year apparently.
>>
>> Promising something virtually impossible to achieve with an
>> implementation date after the general election, what could he be thinking?
--
Regards,
Stephen
|