Nurses: The NHS is at breaking point
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38586415
Personally, I think it's wrong that we are overworking such crucial members of our society. Whats the answer? Replace all our nurses with foreign agency workers who won't complain?
I know there is sever mismanagement of funds within the NHS, and we may not even see it fixed within our lifetimes, so what is a short term solution. I doubt it's just putting more money into it is it?
Personally, I think it's wrong that we are overworking such crucial members of our society. Whats the answer? Replace all our nurses with foreign agency workers who won't complain?
I know there is sever mismanagement of funds within the NHS, and we may not even see it fixed within our lifetimes, so what is a short term solution. I doubt it's just putting more money into it is it?
s1962a said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38586415
Personally, I think it's wrong that we are overworking such crucial members of our society. Whats the answer? Replace all our nurses with foreign agency workers who won't complain?
I know there is sever mismanagement of funds within the NHS, and we may not even see it fixed within our lifetimes, so what is a short term solution. I doubt it's just putting more money into it is it?
Adding more money certainly isn't a viable solution. Increasing efficiency is, but where to start? Difficult for already overworked staff to credibly change processes to improve efficiency in the short term.Personally, I think it's wrong that we are overworking such crucial members of our society. Whats the answer? Replace all our nurses with foreign agency workers who won't complain?
I know there is sever mismanagement of funds within the NHS, and we may not even see it fixed within our lifetimes, so what is a short term solution. I doubt it's just putting more money into it is it?
More realistically, limiting the things the NHS does so that the existing money goes further on the important things - that's the only credible solution in my opinion.
There's probably some scope for fewer management, greater hands on staff too!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 12th January 12:58
Yeah, seems to be it. Maybe fixing the social care problem (one of the nurses talked about bed blocking) is a better option.
Also, why is private healthcare taxed as a BIK? surely if someone takes themself out of the NHS system (for the most part) they shouldnt be penalised for it further.
Also, why is private healthcare taxed as a BIK? surely if someone takes themself out of the NHS system (for the most part) they shouldnt be penalised for it further.
This isn't just Nurses feeling the strain. Across the board staff are voting with their feet. Within my workplace we are losing staff at a rate of knots. Three have walked within the last week, and many more are on the verge of going.
The workload is constant and extreme. Missing food for a whole shift 10 hour is not uncommon, nor is finishing 2-3 hours late.
The system isn't at breaking point; it's already beyond that.
The workload is constant and extreme. Missing food for a whole shift 10 hour is not uncommon, nor is finishing 2-3 hours late.
The system isn't at breaking point; it's already beyond that.
Willy Nilly said:
It's hardly a surprise that there are loads of people ill in January. Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot of bone idle nurses.
Quite possibly, but I'm sure that many large organisations have some people who work harder than others. Regardless, I'm not sure that's the key to the problems the NHS faces.sidicks said:
Adding more money certainly isn't a viable solution. Increasing efficiency is, but where to start? Difficult for already overworked staff to credibly change processes to improve efficiency in the short term.
More realistically, limiting the things the NHS does so that the existing money goes further on the important things - that's the only credible solution in my opinion.
There's probably some scope for fewer management, greater hands on staff too!
It's a knotty one. I have no doubt that the NHS could easily swallow whatever money is chucked at it, as new conditions are identified and new treatments developed (a single course of some drugs can be £10,000s). A frank conversation is needed about what the NHS is there for, what it can and can't afford to do, and how much the taxpayer is willing to pay for it and how - is a different funding model needed?More realistically, limiting the things the NHS does so that the existing money goes further on the important things - that's the only credible solution in my opinion.
There's probably some scope for fewer management, greater hands on staff too!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 12th January 12:58
It also seems from what one reads that a lot of the population need to stop being wet and not rush off to A&E for any minor complaint - a basic appreciation of what the words "Accident" and "Emergency" mean.
s1962a said:
amgmcqueen said:
That's what two decades of mass uncontrolled immigration does for you....
Barring health tourism, aren't immigrants generally younger, and of working age? Probably aren't as much of a burden on the NHS as our own population.They generally pay less into the system, that would make them more of a burden on the NHS then?
Edited by Esseesse on Thursday 12th January 13:54
Esseesse said:
s1962a said:
amgmcqueen said:
That's what two decades of mass uncontrolled immigration does for you....
Barring health tourism, aren't immigrants generally younger, and of working age? Probably aren't as much of a burden on the NHS as our own population.In addition, when you look at research around contributions to public spending costs, there isn't much in it between 'natives', EEA immigrants and non-EEA immigrants.
There are studies which conclude EEA immigrants pay more than natives as a % of their public spending costs.
I'll make an admission here. I'm a nurse - I have been for over 30 years. I work in the NHS in a fairly specialist area. We have been at 100% bed occupancy (or above) since before September last year. With only 12 beds there are some times that we admit patients onto the unit, stabilise them and transfer them out to other wards or departments just so that we can admit another patient. Some beds may have three patients in within one day.
However we also have some patients that no matter how hard we try we cannot discharge them due to a lack of effective social care - with an aging and increasingly frail population this will only increase.
I'm not naive enough to believe that there aren't efficiencies to be made, although many of the easy, quick fixes have already been tried. Watching the BBC2 documentary last night showed a surgeon, theatre and associated staff left unused due to a lack of bed capacity - this isn't just isolated to one hospital though, it's endemic at all of them.
Funding alone isn't the answer, neither is a knee jerk "sack all the managers" call as is seen so often. I'm in the twilight of my career - I've never seen it so bad, I can't wait to retire although with a permanently damaged back whether I can continue to work until then is a rather moot point.
SD.
However we also have some patients that no matter how hard we try we cannot discharge them due to a lack of effective social care - with an aging and increasingly frail population this will only increase.
I'm not naive enough to believe that there aren't efficiencies to be made, although many of the easy, quick fixes have already been tried. Watching the BBC2 documentary last night showed a surgeon, theatre and associated staff left unused due to a lack of bed capacity - this isn't just isolated to one hospital though, it's endemic at all of them.
Funding alone isn't the answer, neither is a knee jerk "sack all the managers" call as is seen so often. I'm in the twilight of my career - I've never seen it so bad, I can't wait to retire although with a permanently damaged back whether I can continue to work until then is a rather moot point.
SD.
Europa1 said:
sidicks said:
Adding more money certainly isn't a viable solution. Increasing efficiency is, but where to start? Difficult for already overworked staff to credibly change processes to improve efficiency in the short term.
More realistically, limiting the things the NHS does so that the existing money goes further on the important things - that's the only credible solution in my opinion.
There's probably some scope for fewer management, greater hands on staff too!
It's a knotty one. I have no doubt that the NHS could easily swallow whatever money is chucked at it, as new conditions are identified and new treatments developed (a single course of some drugs can be £10,000s). A frank conversation is needed about what the NHS is there for, what it can and can't afford to do, and how much the taxpayer is willing to pay for it and how - is a different funding model needed?More realistically, limiting the things the NHS does so that the existing money goes further on the important things - that's the only credible solution in my opinion.
There's probably some scope for fewer management, greater hands on staff too!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 12th January 12:58
It also seems from what one reads that a lot of the population need to stop being wet and not rush off to A&E for any minor complaint - a basic appreciation of what the words "Accident" and "Emergency" mean.
The problem is that no one has the balls to say that the current system is unsustainable, because that would be political suicide. Until someone does say it, nothing changes and we go round in circles.
Its clear that you cannot make efficiency savings by scrimping on staff, as we see you end up with Mid Staffs type issues.
It would appear that the least worst option is limiting availability of certain treatments, and here we run into problems because it seems to, as with anything they try to do, be a total cockup. We hear regularly of disabled toddlers being refused operations to walk, or cancer sufferers refused drugs - then hear about that vile bint that got a boob job by complaining about "self esteem".
It seems to vary by region as a postcode lottery, so surely it would be vastly more simple abd cheaper to have a central blanket decision on what treatments the NHS will and will not pay for?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff