FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > D*unken NHS Patients
D*unken NHS Patients
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"could expand it to cover smokers ( waits for the heavens to open ) ps ,, no pork sosages were used in the reply on this thread ,,, there all in me stew" If it wasnt for smokers there wouldnt be an nhs lol, perhaps the government should just wack £3 tax on a pint to cover cost like they do with smokers. | |||
"I think the difference is that being d*unk is somewhat self inflicted. " So are sporting injuries, do we really want to go down the route of putting something in place that may prevent the uptake of a healthy activity? I agree that we drink too much in the UK but that is something the NHS cannot tackle alone. | |||
"Hmm, why should the fact they are d*unk have any bearing on their treatment? What next, walkers/climbers/cyclists/runners etc made to pay for their treatment because they made the choice to partake in a 'risky' activity? The NHS is either free at point of use or it's not. This is the thin end of a privatist wedge designed to soften us up to the idea of a profit-driven health industry akin to the US." I'm not sure it's a charge to cover the fact they got hurt while they were d*unk. Pissed people are a huge issue in A&E often abusive and a risk for the people trying to do their jobs. | |||
"I think the difference is that being d*unk is somewhat self inflicted. " So is smoking IMHO  | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Hmm, why should the fact they are d*unk have any bearing on their treatment? What next, walkers/climbers/cyclists/runners etc made to pay for their treatment because they made the choice to partake in a 'risky' activity? The NHS is either free at point of use or it's not. This is the thin end of a privatist wedge designed to soften us up to the idea of a profit-driven health industry akin to the US. I'm not sure it's a charge to cover the fact they got hurt while they were d*unk. Pissed people are a huge issue in A&E often abusive and a risk for the people trying to do their jobs." That's different though isn't it? If they cause a problem for others and are a danger/harrassment to the staff & other patients then by all means bill them for the extra costs, but to bill people for an injury taken whilst under the influence? Both times i've shattered my knee was whilst drinking, both times simply slipped on a wooden floor and dislocated then broke my patella - should i be charged for that? | |||
| |||
"That's different though isn't it? If they cause a problem for others and are a danger/harrassment to the staff & other patients then by all means bill them for the extra costs, but to bill people for an injury taken whilst under the influence? Both times i've shattered my knee was whilst drinking, both times simply slipped on a wooden floor and dislocated then broke my patella - should i be charged for that?" It is different yes, I was just making the point. I would be just as annoyed myself. Especially as I've never started a fight with anyone in my entire life, d*unk or sober. Just a bunch of nobs ruining it for everyone else. Sound familiar?  | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The problem we have now adays is that govenment guidlines state that if a paramedic or ambulance is called we have to respond and if it is a head injury we have to bring them in, often as not with a d*unken patient ( and i use the word patient loosley) they are too d*unk to give coherrent answers and we have to bring them in knowing full well that they wont remember anything in the morning. All the treatment they will recieve will be obs and a mattress in a spare cubicle, but yet we still have to take the abuse from them. Try telling a mother that her child will have to wait as it is not safe enough to take her child to the treatment area as we have a situation!! If d*unken injuries were charged for then we could have a seperate area to 'treat' the d*unks and make our job easier and more cost effective." Surely a better solution is to have the power to refuse treatment to the ones who are abusive? They seem like seperate issues to me(although they are highly interlinked), I'm sure not ALL the pissed people are abusive? | |||
| |||
"who decides whos d*unk ???" They will probably have a blood test and a limit. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Unfortunatly we are not allowed to refuse treatment, its a human rights law. And also an ethical one too. As much as we would love to refuse some people who dont deserve any time spent on them." Ok, can see that... but it seems to me that the issue isn't the fact they are d*unk, just the fact they are abusive. The government are just tarnishing everyone with the same brush do you not think? | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I am actually signed off work at the moment as i was grabbed by a patient in A&E who WAS d*unk and he pulled my shoulder out of its socket. That was 3 weeks ago, but because im a bank nurse i dont recieve any sick pay for the time i have to take off, despite it being an injury i recieved at work. Now who pays my rent while im off!!! Yes you guys via your taxes. still wanna argue the point for d*unks being charged for wasting valuable NHS time!!! " I agree, it should be funded, I was offering an alternative to a difficult way of funding it. PS dont you have the chance of a civil case against the guy(assume it was male) that caused the injury stopping you from working/earning? PPS Criminal injury compensation? assault is a crime, might you get something there? | |||
| |||
"Nom, while the principle is there, it happens all too often so there is no point in trying to pursue a civil case. After all he was classed as a patient and unfortunatley mandatory training covers moving and handling, safety etc etc etc, so our hands are tied. And as a d*unk he didnt know wht he was doing. Or was it the bump on the head that he ad apparently recieved while lashed up!!! difficult to prove." I'm sorry to hear that, it all seems very unfair   | |||
"Ok how DO you treat a d*unk!! " Lol, I dont know, I'm in forensics so d*unk or not they tend to cause less trouble. In all seriousness, I get your point... and it may be a high percentage of people who are pissed that are also abusive. I'm certain though if I was pissed and needed treatment, I would not be like that at all. So why should I pay extra? Surely the one who caused your dislocated arm should be the one who covers the cost? | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"A new report suggests that d*unken NHS patients should be fined to cover the cost of their treatment. Any views at all. How easy would it be to get any sense out of them let alone money!" people in prison are entitled so free health care so why should someone, whos only crime is they got d*unk, have to pay? And anyway we have already paid for it, thro out taxes, NHS isnt free, dont know about you lot but ive been paying for it for nearly 20 years | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
  | |||
"maybe its the front line staff dont like dealing with d*unks ,,, thats understanable ,, but as the sayin goes if ya cant stand the heat !!!!!" I don't think nurses went into the job knowing they were going to get abused and assaulted by d*unks. I am of the view though as someone else said, where does it end. We probably all do something that the NHS could say we are causing ourselves,be it being overweight, smoking, playing sports, drinking, if they start charging just to treat a d*unk, then they could start charging for people who smoke next or have an extra burger. Maybe if they are going to charge, it is if they become abusive and have to be restrained or injure a nurse like Betty. | |||
"my head hurts ,,,, do i go to a and e ,, the offy or nhs direct????" go to the scotland chat-room we have experts in all three! | |||
| |||
| |||
"If someone is d*unk and being argumentative or violent on our streets they get fined, so what’s the big deal if they get fined for doing the same in a hospital?" I thought I'd posted about this yesterday but don't see it. I see no reason why a nurse or doctor should be less well protected than a polis or a firey or a traffic warden (contentious one that) or a bus driver and so on going about their duty. Stick the nut on a polis and, d*unk or not, you'll face the consequences. | |||
"maybe its the front line staff dont like dealing with d*unks ,,, thats understanable ,, but as the sayin goes if ya cant stand the heat !!!!!" No matter what ive said willy, you have tried to put it down, you even asked my rate of pay which has no bearing on this topic. But i feel that it was so you could have a pop and say if you take the money take the grief!! This comment above proves it. I get enough grief while working A&E with little thanks - not that i ask for any, as its the job i trained hard to do. But i will not be part of a forum where small minded people as yourself think its ok to riddicule and try put down nurses who often put there own lifes on the line for others. # So folks this is betty signing out of the forums once and for all, let the small minded people have it back - i really couldnt give a shit anymore!!! Oh and to the poster of the above comment perhaps you may like to volunteer your services at the local A& e unit, i can guarantee that after a saturday night shift you will change your opinion totally. But then again i doubt you could handle it. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Betty dont let him get your down, i have been watching this thread with interest, and it is obvious to anyone watching that the gentlemen is clearly just looking for an argument. Stick in there chic, certain people like trolling sites looking for someone to goad! A nurses training is one of the hardest professions to do and i salute you and your workmates for the tremeendous job you do, especially under hard circumstances with crap conditions. Rise above it and keep posting your input is valued by many." HEY ,, i,m sorry if i have upset anyone esp you betty ,, so firstly i offer a full unreserved apology ,,, never thought or meant to cause any upset ,, yes i do goad sometimes and on this occasion i overstepped the mark so once a gain i offer a full appology to yourself betty and anyone else has taken offence , dave | |||
"Betty dont let him get your down, i have been watching this thread with interest, and it is obvious to anyone watching that the gentlemen is clearly just looking for an argument. Stick in there chic, certain people like trolling sites looking for someone to goad! A nurses training is one of the hardest professions to do and i salute you and your workmates for the tremeendous job you do, especially under hard circumstances with crap conditions. Rise above it and keep posting your input is valued by many. HEY ,, i,m sorry if i have upset anyone esp you betty ,, so firstly i offer a full unreserved apology ,,, never thought or meant to cause any upset ,, yes i do goad sometimes and on this occasion i overstepped the mark so once a gain i offer a full appology to yourself betty and anyone else has taken offence , dave " Respect for that | |||
| |||
"we choose our carreer's they don't choose us, be we bus drivers, firemen,police officers or what ever we do to bring home the cash, we all have one thing in common well maybe two. 1) what we do we enjoy,we do it because we choose to do it,we do it because it gives us a sence of purpose, the feeling that we are doing something that helps other's 2) what the brits do best is complain, we are renowned for it world wide. Life is all about choice's. I've heard it said that some of the most stroppy patiants are the medical proffesion them selves ( thats said with tongue firmly in cheek). But lets face it no matter what you do as a carreer we all deserve to be able to go about our daily routine unmolested, so nurse's or anyone who works for a living deserve protection from aggressive behavour. ergo do we fine everyone who display's aggresion for what ever reason. i for one see this as impossible to regulate. but i do see a need for some protection for everyone who is in the firing line, but a system of fines is just another tax on the population to put in the coffer's and be spent on something other than what it is designed for ( ie road tax, i've no idea how many cars/lorries/bus's/motorcycle's actually use/pay to use our roads, but the revenue picked up from them must run into the thousand's of millions of £'s and look at the state of our roads, point is the money never reach's the heart of the problem. the goverment needs to raise cash to keep the country afloat, and raising tax's is always seen as a vote looser so they look for softer ways to raise it, ways in which it's not seen as a tax. and as a by-line the majority of d*unk's who cause the trouble that this fine is aimed at arn't in a position to be able to pay the fine in the first place.most are living on the street's with no firm income, you only have to watch "police camera action" to see that on the whole this is true ok the young men and women do go out on a friday/saturday night and have one or two more than they should and do end up having an altication over this or that but on the whole the injuries are minor. and treated at the road side. lets get to grips with the fact that the money raised wont stop it happening nor will it be used to prevent it happening. it's another stealth tax. and will be spent by someone in parliment who has two house's 5 cat's 6 dogs's and a lake full of duck's, ok thats a synical veiw point but it also has a very big eliment of truth in it too. god bless our medical staff as they do a wonderful job, be them nurse's doctor's, surgeons or the ladie's and gent's who sweep and clean the floor's.without them we would be in one hell of a state " Thank you. Seldom has one post made me smile so much. Keep up the good work. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Its simple really, stick 60% tax on all alcohol sales, and punish the majority that don’t end up in A&E every weekend, or make these people pay for the havoc they cause. Alternatively we can close your eyes and hope it all goes away. " Wasn't there an experiment in a couple of West Lothian towns last year where you had to be over 21 to buy drink in off sales? I'm sure the opinion was that it had led to a reduction in violence but I wonder how much of that was down to the increased police and media presence as they tried to work out how well it was/ wasn't working. | |||
"I think the difference is that being d*unk is somewhat self inflicted. " But as some one has already said what about walking, climbing etc You have a choice? So is this not self inflicting yourself to danger by doing these activities? | |||
"I think the difference is that being d*unk is somewhat self inflicted. But as some one has already said what about walking, climbing etc You have a choice? So is this not self inflicting yourself to danger by doing these activities?" alking down the Absolutely. Walking down the road when a car mounts the pavement and knocks you down is one thing. Running across the road against the traffic lights is something very different. Going for a walk in your local park is one thing. Walking up the Buchaille is something very different. | |||
| |||
"I think the difference is that being d*unk is somewhat self inflicted. But as some one has already said what about walking, climbing etc You have a choice? So is this not self inflicting yourself to danger by doing these activities?alking down the Absolutely. Walking down the road when a car mounts the pavement and knocks you down is one thing. Running across the road against the traffic lights is something very different. Going for a walk in your local park is one thing. Walking up the Buchaille is something very different. " Some of these sports are adrenaline filled so you are putting you self at risk with nature so when you go for a drink and get absolutely shit faced you are putting yourself in danger by knocking ten barrels of shit out of your senses. I have been there and had good times and bad times. I ended up having to go to a hand specialist in London (St Georges) because of a stupid night out. Learnt my lesson now (hopefully) Got the scars to prove it. | |||
Set the bar high, I dont know the figures but lets say someone on less than £10,000 a year is entitled to get the £10 grand in benefits, ok set the bar at £15 or £20 grand and if they get below that let the government pay the insurance, that way nobody would be in a position whereby they cant afford it.
Watch the kind of service our brilliant Doctors and Nurses are capable of giving us if they are not restricted by costs, shortage of nurses, having to prescribe the cheaper option, inability to employ the correct number of cleaners or other hospital staff.
I am sure this basic idea can be tweaked and bettered by people more intelligent than me | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"quoting me the bad points of insurance in the USA neither impresses or alarms me, the USA can't even get aid to victims of its own disasters. If we were to look into insurance as a way to go I would imagine we would adopt systems that have been tried and tested in Countries like Sweden, Switzerland and many others. Some research should be done in the US to see what can happen if you dont get it right." come on this is Britain your talking about when was the last time you saw anything the government implemented in this country go right,if you allow the bean counters control of major project's their first concern is their own financial benefits. the NHS as it is is very successful at what it does and all it needs is tweaking in the right place's (hospital management pocket's to start with) allow the monies that are set side for the service to actually reach the service. we have had and still have one of the best health service's in the world per-say, all that's needed is to get back to doing what they do best, and to stop all this in house bickering let the men and women who have spent years training to do a specialist job do their job, take out these high paid project managers and allow the cash to flow where it's needed, we have in this country some fine and very good examples of hospital's that work well on the whole, the problem that's the issue here isn't whether the system work's it's how we protect those within the system from aggressive behaviour of the minority who go out get d*unk and then require the aid of these people. If your d*unk a taxi wont take you on as a fare, if your d*unk a bus driver has the right to refuse you to travel on his bus, if your d*unk a doorman has the right to refuse you entry, your not fit to be in these place's because your unpredictable, ergo if your d*unk and end up in A&E the staff after assessing your needs should have the right to refuse treatment till such time as your no longer a risk to their own well being, it's that simple really, as long as the injuries are not life threatening then hold off till the person is less of a risk, and if the injuries are life threatening I'd imagine that in the major percentages of case's the person involved wouldn't be in any condition to be of much risk to others. these are my views on the subject, and as i said the issue is d*unks in A&E not the health system in general | |||
| |||
"Hmmmmm interesting, Betty is in the frontline here, I fully appreciate the problems as she has explained them. Its a funding problem, with enough money then a safe,secure,with adequate security to ensure healthcare providers safety envirionment could be provided. Safe, for everyone, no need for other patients to wait, (mum n daughter seen promptly) we need to fund it tho. put the cost onto booze?? hmmm what about those that DONT require treatment paying the extra?? Make the d*unks pay??? as mentioned difficult and possibly even causing more probs, hard to monitor,hard to enforce, hmmm 2 maybe 3 less nuclear weapons ( pointless anyway) multi multi million pound saving. Every A&E in UK could be staffed 24/7 with expertly trained staff and with proper equipment to cope in this dangerous envirionment. " I had this argument with someone who had studied the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and my question was "why do we need so many?", thinking as you did that we could save some cash. His answer was brutal, if we ever got into a conflict where, god forbid, we had to use these weapons, then its not enough to have just enough missiles to take on one opponent. Many countries have agreements that tie them to mutual support with others, and they have plans in place to decide when they should step in and use their missiles too. So, someone has a pop at us, and we retaliate, using all of ours, and hopefully we do more damage to them than they do to us, which, on paper anyway, makes us the winner. Shortly thereafter one, or perhaps more than one, of their buddies then kicks the plan into action to have a pop at us...... and we are out of missiles to either threaten them with, or actually retaliate if we had the chance. Unfortunately, there isnt just one threat out there now, and we have to have enough missiles to make anyone stop and think about their chances of success against us, its expensive, but having got into this arms race way back, we are now tied to it. If given the choice, I would like more of my tax to go to frontline services in the NHS, but without that option I would like to see anyone who abuses frontline staff to be billed for their treatment, d*unk or not. | |||
"Why not simply refuse to treat A&E d*unkards when they become abusive? They're obviously not that injured if they can still put up a fight. Let security eject them until they're sober enough to conduct themselves in a civil manner." Ive heard that they do refuse them to a certain extent but I could be wrong | |||
" .............. If given the choice, I would like more of my tax to go to frontline services in the NHS, but without that option .........." D'ye mean give more to the NHS and less to (say) International Development or Education so your tax bill remains the same? That ain't gonna happen. If, however, you want to give money to the NHS they'll be happy to take whatever you have to offer. | |||
| |||
