
We interrupt our regular programming of superficial fare and bird blather with actual information.
Given this summer's fervor over the issue of whether the United States should develop some kind of government-subsidized health insurance, I was curious to hear from my friend Julie T.
Julie and I met at Bowling Green State University in the 1980s, where we were both journalism students. After a few years in the biz, Julie switched gears and went to nursing school. She worked in Cleveland, in California, and as a traveling nurse.
For the last seven years, she has been checking blood pressures and administering meds in hospitals in London.
For the record, Julie (like me) leans liberal but isn't especially political, from my point of view. She can be a contrarian and a skeptic. Also for the record, I didn't ask her to write a pro-nationalized health care position paper. My wide-open question to her was, "Write me something about your perceptions about the national health care system in England - pros, cons, the way it is better or worse than here in the U.S."
Here's what Julie had to say:
I work for a European leg of an American hospital system which owns six hospitals in Central London. I work in the largest - 250 beds. I pay an approximate 9% of my monthly salary for National Insurance, which includes the National Health Service and a pension plan. I also have private coverage through my employer. It allows me to be treated by any consultant (doctor) who has admitting rights to any of the six hospitals, and admitted to any of the six hospitals. I also have a pension plan through my employer.
My general practitioner is around the corner and I've never had a problem getting an appointment for that day or for when I have day off. I haven't paid a single medical bill in seven years, save the money required to get a referral letter to a consultant under my private health care plan. I like the fact I could lose my job and still have health care. I like the fact I can switch jobs without having to face a waiting period or risk rejection related to a pre-existing medical condition. I like the fact that I am going to Australia and will have rights to reciprocal health care in the event of an immediate or emergency need. Ditto when I travel anywhere in Europe. You don't hear that people are selling their homes to pay for hospital bills. I like the fact that kids, people over 60 and people with chronic illness and handicaps don't pay for their medications. I pay £6 ish for a prescription.
It bugs me I cannot get a mammogram covered until I am 50 but it is only £160 at a local breast centre and, well, money well spent. It worries me some that people who have a myocardial infarction don't always get to the Cath Lab immediately in the NHS. Certain NHS Trusts refer to the private sector to ensure their waiting times are met. We get those patients and the NHS foots the bill. There are a lot of big wards in the NHS where all the patients are located in the same room. (Think 1950s black and white English movies.) I hear moans and groans about that from patients. But in many ways, those wards are better for the elderly as they look out for each other, help each other, talk to each other, comfort each other, push the call bell, etc.
I know more good stories than horror stories about the NHS. Yes, some of the buildings and equipment are ancient but those issues are being addressed where needed. But then you have state-of-the art facilities, too. I have a friend whose husband was treated for lymphoma off and on for 10 years and never saw a bill. She estimates his care was well over £100,000. I have another friend who was diagnosed with a pituitary gland problem, was immediately referred to the specialists, had her surgery and got on with her life and never paid a bill. Sure, the hospital she stayed in was dark and cramped. Another friend landed in A&E (ER) after being found by the police passed out on a sidewalk (her drink was spiked) and the doctor did a thorough history and physical, called her boss, referred her to a dentist and in two weeks, she had a replaced front tooth. That cost her £200.
The government has targets to get people seen in a certain time for certain conditions. A friend of mine worked at two hospitals scheduling those appointments and says the doctors do their best to squeeze in the emergent ones. That happens in the states, too.
I've been trying to read and watch U.S. news via the Internet to keep up-to-date on what's happening there. Seems like a lot of fear, an opportunity for the rumormongers to spread lies and a chance for people to perhaps respond to the frustration that their chosen candidate isn't the President. One of my siblings pays $1000 a month for the family's health care. Is anyone in the U.S. noticing that Americans spend twice as much for health care costs compared to other countries and yet we DON'T live any longer?
So I hope that answers some of your questions.