Student Medical Center to Start Charging

OneMoreThing!

How do people feel about this one then? I'm not sure about it to be honest...

OneMoreThing!

Prices are as follows
Doctor: 25 Nurse: 10 Psychiatric Consultation: 25 Physio: 40 STD Clinic: 10 Contraceptive advice: 10

eoins23456

pack of *****!

OneMoreThing!

Here's a link to the TST article for more info if ye want it.

Union fails to prevent medical centre charges

wnolan1992

And it's on the front page of An Focal as well.

eoins23456

great job hushing everything up as usual until the last minute.

Ginge Young

Currently, I don't see an issue with it because it is still much cheaper than visiting a GP outside of the college.

Aoife Kenny said it quite right in an focal when she said the time of getting things free is over and if the service wants to be maintained these things have to happen.

People just got too comfortable over the golden years, too used to things for free, when in reality we were probably just setting ourselves up for a big fall.

I would be interested in seeing figures on how often the health centre is used for and for what purposes as well (each of the headings described in the pricing).

wnolan1992

I'm undecided on the actual decsion at the moment as I don't yet know enough about the medical centre to comment.

But it's pretty disgraceful that twice this year we find out a major decision has been made at the very last available opportunity.

Dromroe, Cappa and the bike shop closed, we only found out because the shop doors were locked.

Now today, we find out this. They HAVE to have known about this for a while. No doubt in my mind about it. Why the hell wasn't it published sooner? Moreover, the deadline for the print issue of An Focal was last week AFAIK, so this story must have been written before the weekend.

So why was it not put on anfocal.ie? Surely It makes more sense to try and increase readership of the online service as much as possible and slowly reduce print runs to save money. Totaly arseways imo.

NTMK

OneMoreThing! wrote: »

Prices are as follows
Doctor: 25 Nurse: 10 Psychiatric Consultation: 25 Physio: 40 STD Clinic: 10 Contraceptive advice: 10

Great, you'll only get treatment if you can afford it. :rolleyes:
if this was in place this year i would have dropped out because last semester i was suffering from serious anxiety attacks and depression i had no way of paying for the Psychiatric services, €25 euro equated to 2 weeks of food and there are students far worse of than i am.


This won't affect me im finished in a month but will seriously affect a lot of students in the future that cant afford these services

also isnt it lovely how "our" union is completely silent on the matter and leave it till week 11 to announce this and kept it under wraps for a headline. great job of protecting the students interests there.:rolleyes:

Adam_M

Ginge Young wrote: »

Currently, I don't see an issue with it because it is still much cheaper than visiting a GP outside of the college.

Aoife Kenny said it quite right in an focal when she said the time of getting things free is over and if the service wants to be maintained these things have to happen.

People just got too comfortable over the golden years, too used to things for free, when in reality we were probably just setting ourselves up for a big fall.

I would be interested in seeing figures on how often the health centre is used for and for what purposes as well (each of the headings described in the pricing).

Is it really much cheaper though? Previously, you would have to have seen a nurse in there before a doctor. If that is still the case you're looking at €35 if it is an accumulative cost.

On top of that, I don't feel the standard in there is sufficient. I was diagnosed with a kidney infection in there in first year and given antibiotics. A little research indicated that I more than likely actually had a chest infection given my symptoms so I went to a doctor off campus who diagnosed it as a chest infection. Hardly inspires confidence.

The cost of seeing a physio (€40) isn't that cheap - again do you have to see a nurse first before you can be seen by the physio?

I think people are more upset and outraged by the fact this is being announced in week 11, Semester 2, with no significant prior mention of it. I can see a huge amount of people moving their business elsewhere - either to their own GP or a doctor in the local area where the standard is better, waiting lists for an appointment aren't as bad (This will reduce in UL due to the costs being introduced) and where they won't feel like they are being rushed due to the fact the doctor/nurse wants to see the next patient. I have never been in there longer than 10 minutes and even that was at a push.

Ginge Young

Adam_M wrote: »

I think people are more upset and outraged by the fact this is being announced in week 11, Semester 2, with no significant prior mention of it. I can see a huge amount of people moving their business elsewhere - either to their own GP or a doctor in the local area where the standard is better, waiting lists for an appointment aren't as bad (This will reduce in UL due to the costs being introduced) and where they won't feel like they are being rushed due to the fact the doctor/nurse wants to see the next patient. I have never been in there longer than 10 minutes and even that was at a push.

At that is the case, but that is separate issue to the prices themselves.

I've never used the health centre, except on one occasion and when I couldn't get in I went to a GP off campus. That may be true about the nurse/doctor but it is still cheaper than off campus.

The reason I wanted to see figures of usage is to see where the main traffic is and from there work upon getting individual things cheaper. It would also given an indication of the cost it is actually putting on the University.

Currently based off the info I have I don't have a problem with it. While I understand this could effect some students it is no longer realistic to think everything can be gotten for free.

Why should the University fund our medical expenses, if an issue is going to be made of it then why not ask the government to make all GP visits free for students, because in reality that is what everyone wants.

As I said however, my initial reaction is no problem with the change itself. Problem with how we were told about it on short notice and how it was "too sensitive" to release before hand because that is tripe, and a problem with the lack of students involvement in it, however I imagine that even if there was, it would still have just been "keep it free".

Perhaps it could get cheaper who knows. All I remember is paying 60 euro for my last GP visit, so in my eyes UL is still doing alright. The level of service I've always heard mixed reactions about, so maybe that is something that should be tackled in conjunction with it.

eoins23456

Ginge Young wrote: »

Currently, I don't see an issue with it because it is still much cheaper than visiting a GP outside of the college.

Aoife Kenny said it quite right in an focal when she said the time of getting things free is over and if the service wants to be maintained these things have to happen.

People just got too comfortable over the golden years, too used to things for free, when in reality we were probably just setting ourselves up for a big fall.

I would be interested in seeing figures on how often the health centre is used for and for what purposes as well (each of the headings described in the pricing).

My local physio is 45 euro. You have to see the nurse before you can see the physio in UL so that will cost 50 euro. Massive step up from free. That surpasses some students weekly budget.


Maintain the service? The service wasnt great in the first place so were getting less for more now basically.The only good thing out of this is the time to get appointment will go down as its a strong possibility the amount of people availing of the doctor will go down with the price

Popoutman

It'll be interesting to see how this affects those that need to get I-Grades ratified..

Ginge Young

eoins23456 wrote: »

My local physio is 45 euro. You have to see the nurse before you can see the physio in UL so that will cost 50 euro. Massive step up from free. That surpasses some students weekly budget.


Maintain the service? The service wasnt great in the first place so were getting less for more now basically.The only good thing out of this is the time to get appointment will go down as its a strong possibility the amount of people availing of the doctor will go down with the price

Hey man like I said I can't speak from experience, but while I was happy that it was there for so long, I am struggling to think of a logical answer why a University has a duty of care to provide free medical services to students.

But that's just me. I think if students are going to argue this, it isn't a local issue with the University but a national one.

I'm as skint as the next person to be fair, if I needed to go to a GP urgently there are others ways I can get money (friends/family) and while I know that isn't a fix for everyone it is at least one outlet.

Perhaps a mechanism could be introduced by which students can pay at a later date? Or in installments? I think the idea of it being free is gone, I haven't seen the figures like I said but I can't figure out in my head how it would ever be sustainable.

People can set up specific payment arrangements for fees, why not with medical services? People need to be coming up with solutions other than "it should be free".

Popoutman

It's also poor form that the medical card holders must pay up front as well. There are already processes in place where medical centres get paid from the health boards, without the card holder having to pay anything.

Steeevvyb

Sounds like it was on some sabbats minds during the husts

http://soundcloud.com/thomondstudenttimes/paddy-rockett-sound-byte

Stephen
TST

reunion

What next, charging for the library?

This is a disgrace, how long did the sabbats know about this? Why did they do to stop this? What did the SU get for getting rid of RAG week and replacing it with charity week?

1/3rd of a page which affects 9,000 to 12,000 students is a disgrace, it deserves a lot more time and attention as it effects a high portion of the student body.

This is a service which is still being advertised as being free. So when is this coming into force? Is it already in force?

They should allow 1 free visit a semester. If someone has frequent visits then maybe they should be charged.

It makes no sence to say that you have to start charging because it is losing money BUT at the same time say you will increase opening hours and build a new student medical centre (increasing expenditure). This sounds more like they want a new medical centre and want the students to pay for it.

I say keep the existing one, make the new medical centre in the new SU and don't charge students.

munchkin_utd

WHAT?
the university was giving free medical care out of their own pockets?
Truely boom time economics there that they have so much cash floating around that expensive perks for students could be funded.

Ginge Young

reunion wrote: »

What next, charging for the library?

Yes because charging for the library and charging for medical expenses are exactly the same........

I have no idea surrounding plans for new medical centre etc and all that, but I don't understand why a medical service should be provided completely for free by a University.

What people seem to be asking for is free medical expenses for students. Take it to the government then. This isn't an issue that can be kept in a little nutshell in UL.

One free visit a semester isn't a bad idea, but again I would like to see figures. I have no idea where they can be got, but figures detailing how much its costs the University along with how often the service is used need to gotten before anyone can get a clear grasp of this.

"rabble rabble free rabble rabble" is not going to get anyone anywhere. The costs I imagine are there to stay for the time being, so it's time to come up with some reasonable solutions.

reunion wrote: »

It makes no sence to say that you have to start charging because it is losing money BUT at the same time say you will increase opening hours and build a new student medical centre (increasing expenditure). This sounds more like they want a new medical centre and want the students to pay for it.

I say keep the existing one, make the new medical centre in the new SU and don't charge students.

Your assuming your correct about the intention behind the introduction of a fee. I think it sounds more like, the University budget is screwed across all areas, money must be saved, therefore instead of providing free healthcare, they provide healthcare (whatever about the standard of service), for cheaper than you would get for the most part anywhere else.

You making it sound like a conspiracy.

CJKeane

reunion wrote: »

So when is this coming into force? Is it already in force?

Obviously you didn't read the article.

As it says in the first line:

IT has recently emerged that UL Student Health Centre, located in the main building, will be charging for medical services as of this coming September.

reunion

Ginge Young wrote: »

Yes because charging for the library and charging for medical expenses are exactly the same........

They have to pay someone to allow students to rent out books and they have to get new books in.

Ginge Young wrote: »

I have no idea surrounding plans for new medical centre etc and all that, but I don't understand why a medical service should be provided completely for free by a University.

I agree with the medical service having a potential charge, but a Psychiatric Consultation costing €25? is this seperate to the student couselling service?

Ginge Young wrote: »

What people seem to be asking for is free medical expenses for students. Take it to the government then. This isn't an issue that can be kept in a little nutshell in UL.

Free consultation is not free medical expenses, they recommend further action, be it to see your local GP or some medication. They don't pay a students medical expenses for a lung transplant.

How long has this service been in place for?

Ginge Young wrote: »

One free visit a semester isn't a bad idea, but again I would like to see figures. I have no idea where they can be got, but figures detailing how much its costs the University along with how often the service is used need to gotten before anyone can get a clear grasp of this.

These figures should have been given along with the justification for charging.

I can think of a few things that could be done.

1. charge people who abuse the use of the free service

2. reduce the hours during non-exam time but keep the exisiting opening times from Week 12 onwards.

3. 1st visit free per semester.

4. include it the registration fees

If all else fails we have a backup option that requires a bit of effort.

reunion

CJKeane wrote: »

Obviously you didn't read the article.

As it says in the first line:

I read the online paper version which has it at a different font. Which I thought was a snippet from the text below it, which I read.

Aragneer

Thank god I had pysio at the beginning of this semester and not next...

I don't like it. As someone who worries constantly about what on earth is going on when I'm sick, I cannot afford to fork out all the time for doctor's and nurse visits when I'm usually really sick all the time

Nonoperational

Adam_M wrote: »

On top of that, I don't feel the standard in there is sufficient. I was diagnosed with a kidney infection in there in first year and given antibiotics. A little research indicated that I more than likely actually had a chest infection given my symptoms so I went to a doctor off campus who diagnosed it as a chest infection. Hardly inspires confidence.

What?? I can't believe a doctor would confuse a chest and kidney infection. That's absolutely amazing if thats true. How is that even possible?

JoeCares

This is what we get for electing such a weak sabbat team.

This is an epic fail by ULSU. Classic example of how not to do things.

They failed to get anything out of this. It looks like Derek has bent over and gotten ridden by the University once again.

I have no problem paying a nominal charge for the doctor, but the Union and University should be trying to promote sexual health. WTF are ppl being charged for an STI check and for a pill consultation. And fecking psychiatric consultation, come on guys did you not bloody achieve anything when negotiating with the university.

This is the worst case scenario.

Actually maybe the university meeting was held before 12 o`clock so Derek probable missed it because he was still in bed.

I think this just summed up the SU year.

OhMSGlive

JoeCares wrote: »

This is the worst case scenario.

No, closing the centre is the worst case scenario. This is really just a minor inconvenience at the end of the day.

We can't be expecting to get everything for free anymore.

Chimaera

Welcome to real world economics folks. It's unfortunate that fees are being introduced, but budgets are being slashed left, right and centre so something has to give.

If you look at the list of staff employed by the medical centre (http://www2.ul.ie/web/WWW/Services/Student_Affairs/Student_Supports/Student_Health_Centre) you're looking at a very large wage bill. (I'd guess a conservative estimate might be €500 000)

It's also presuming a lot IMO to say that someone will be charged twice for seeing the nurse before the doctor. There's nothing in the article saying that's how it'll be. It's at least equally likely that you'll pay the fee for the highest level of care you receive at the time e.g. if you end up seeing the doctor you get charged €25, but if you're ok just seeing the nurse, then it's €10. This makes more sense to me particularly if seeing the nurse is a condition of seeing the doctor.

Chimaera

JoeCares wrote: »

This is what we get for electing such a weak sabbat team.

This is an epic fail by ULSU. Classic example of how not to do things.

They failed to get anything out of this. It looks like Derek has bent over and gotten ridden by the University once again.

I have no problem paying a nominal charge for the doctor, but the Union and University should be trying to promote sexual health. WTF are ppl being charged for an STI check and for a pill consultation. And fecking psychiatric consultation, come on guys did you not bloody achieve anything when negotiating with the university.

This is the worst case scenario.

Actually maybe the university meeting was held before 12 o`clock so Derek probable missed it because he was still in bed.

I think this just summed up the SU year.

Have you ever gone to see a psychiatrist privately? Typical fees there are in excess of €100 per visit. €25 is a steal. And there's also a free counselling service provided on campus.

To the poster earlier who compared this to the library: a library is essential to the university's core mission of providing a third level education - you absolutely cannot complete your degree without using it at some point (if you do, you're doing it wrong IMO).

Health and wellbeing is important to you personally and is important for completion of your studies, but it's not necessarily the University's job to provide for this. That it does is welcome but it can be argued that they're under no obligation to do so. At some point individuals have to take responsibility for themselves and their lives.

J_E

While I can understand them charging to see the nurse, doctor, etc, I really think it's so important to keep STI screening and contraceptive advice free of charge.

colon

WoW. Students go into shock after a taste of the real world. Ye might want to attend the G.P with that

freyners

not surprised by the fees, too good of a deal to last and since my local GP is 40, even seeing a nurse and doctor is still cheaper (although with a 5er difference, ill go to my own if possible)

disgraceful way to announce it and imo, shows a real lack of respect

Yitzhak Rabin

freyners wrote: »

disgraceful way to announce it and imo, shows a real lack of respect

How is it a lack of respect?

You should be thanking the university for providing a free service for years. They're still subsidising the cost of seeing a physician for you.

In my opinion the university shouldn't be providing these services at all. Waste of taxpayers money. There are plenty of students with rich mammies and daddies who should be footing the bill when Tommy has a hangover and wants some pills, or when Mary wants to get the morning after pill after a drunken night in the lodge.

Get real folks, the days of the state funding the extravagant lifestyles of pampered students are over.

roro1neil0

My contribution in fees etc. to this college will increase next september. Will I get any more services for this contribution? No I Won't. In fact I will get less. I would like to know the contribution the university paid to the student health service and I would like to know if the HSE makes any contribution.

I think anyone undergoing financial hardship should fill out this form now - http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Find_a_Service/entitlements/Medical_Card_GP_Visit_Card_Application_Form.pdf

It could take 6 months to process. If you are entitled to a medical card or a gp visit card you should get one. I would encourage you to find a GP part of the scheme in the local area.

So the education officer says 'the time of getting things for free is over', well it would be nice to know if the su team made a better effort of investigating the situation on behalf of the students. the service is still being subsidised by the university, has anyone questioned whether the health service should cut their own costs?

roro1neil0

yekahS wrote: »

How is it a lack of respect?

You should be thanking the university for providing a free service for years. They're still subsidising the cost of seeing a physician for you.

In my opinion the university shouldn't be providing these services at all. Waste of taxpayers money. There are plenty of students with rich mammies and daddies who should be footing the bill when Tommy has a hangover and wants some pills, or when Mary wants to get the morning after pill after a drunken night in the lodge.

Get real folks, the days of the state funding the extravagant lifestyles of pampered students are over.

not sure why you seem to butt into these threads with your negative anti-student attitude. You're not a student in UL, it's none of your business. If you think you have some right to decide where your tax money is spent send me your p60 so i can see how much tax you're really paying.

Students pay to attend this university, some more than others. They are also tax payers. STI services are carried out for free in some medical centres around limerick, why not include the college heath centre in that scheme?

You have zero insight, ZERO insight, into why people attend the health centre in UL and you have ZERO insight on their financial or personal position so in my opinion you can ram your zero informed opinion up your hole.

IsaacWunder

munchkin_utd wrote: »

WHAT?
the university was giving free medical care out of their own pockets?
Truely boom time economics there that they have so much cash floating around that expensive perks for students could be funded.

It wasn't free, rather it's paid for out of (hefty) registration fees.

Zeouterlimits

I'm okay with the charge, it makes sense. Especially in the current environment. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner.
But why the sudden announcement? Has this not be in progress/work for a while? Feels like it could have been covered and talked about before, rather than thrown out there at the end of term.

yekahS wrote: »

How is it a lack of respect?

You should be thanking the university for providing a free service for years. They're still subsidising the cost of seeing a physician for you.

In my opinion the university shouldn't be providing these services at all. Waste of taxpayers money. There are plenty of students with rich mammies and daddies who should be footing the bill when Tommy has a hangover and wants some pills, or when Mary wants to get the morning after pill after a drunken night in the lodge.

Get real folks, the days of the state funding the extravagant lifestyles of pampered students are over.

You should be ashamed. So many poorer students have benefited from the free Medicentre services. Wave your judgement stick around. You're pathetic.

Ginge Young

IsaacWunder wrote: »

It wasn't free, rather it's paid for out of (hefty) registration fees.

With all due respect, have you looked at what people pay in other countries? It is incredibly cheap to go to college here in respect of other places, with students in many countries graduating 5 to 6 figure sums in debt.

I will never accept anyone calling the fees here hefty, they are light, people just need to accept they need to work, maybe drink less or maybe take out a student loan.

Yitzhak Rabin

roro1neil0 wrote: »

not sure why you seem to butt into these threads with your negative anti-student attitude. You're not a student in UL, it's none of your business. If you think you have some right to decide where your tax money is spent send me your p60 so i can see how much tax you're really paying.

Students pay to attend this university, some more than others. They are also tax payers. STI services are carried out for free in some medical centres around limerick, why not include the college heath centre in that scheme?

You have zero insight, ZERO insight, into why people attend the health centre in UL and you have ZERO insight on their financial or personal position so in my opinion you can ram your zero informed opinion up your hole.

Students taxpayers? Don't make me laugh pal. Any of the ones who do manage to work, work handy jobs behind a cashier in an offie, or making sandwiches in a deli. So even if they are paying tax, its a measly amount, and not enough to remotely cover the services they receive from the state.

No, its left to hard-working taxpayers to fund these 3/4-year holiday camps where some priveleged young fella can get an arts degree, whilst drinking every night of the week, and staying up all night playing xbox.

Its high time some of this entitlement culture embedded in the student culture in Ireland caught up with the real world.

On the issue of the medical centre. Shouldn't be funded by the university. Universities are there to educate, not look after the health of the students. That's the remit of the HSE, and students should be part of the public system like anyone else, and if they want to go the private route, then off with them, but I shouldn't have to pay it.

reunion

yekahS wrote: »

On the issue of the medical centre. Shouldn't be funded by the university. Universities are there to educate, not look after the health of the students. That's the remit of the HSE, and students should be part of the public system like anyone else, and if they want to go the private route, then off with them, but I shouldn't have to pay it.

Per that logic, we should start charging for student counciling.

IsaacWunder

Ginge Young wrote: »

With all due respect, have you looked at what people pay in other countries? It is incredibly cheap to go to college here in respect of other places, with students in many countries graduating 5 to 6 figure sums in debt.

I will never accept anyone calling the fees here hefty, they are light, people just need to accept they need to work, maybe drink less or maybe take out a student loan.

In Ireland, academic fees are paid for by the government.

The contribution, or registration fee, which covers things like student services, computer labs, library and the medical centre, is paid for by students.

With all due respect, if you want to debate academic fees and whether students should pay them, this isn't the thread for it.

roro1neil0

yekahS wrote: »

blah blah students are spongers

You sound like a poor parody of that cambridge fella. This is how it typically works. Students come from families that pay a lot of income tax, not all, but many. Students pay tax in the form of income tax on part-time and holiday time jobs. Mature students may have an extensive tax paying background. Students graduate and more often than not pay high rates of income tax. They also pay a lot of VAT.

Away with you and you're silly trolling, go out for a walk or something.

Ginge Young

IsaacWunder wrote: »

In Ireland, academic fees are paid for by the government.

The contribution, or registration fee, which covers things like student services, computer labs, library and the medical centre, is paid for by students.

With all due respect, if you want to debate academic fees and whether students should pay them, this isn't the thread for it.

Fair enough, I just don't believe the student contribution currently paid is enough to necessarily cover a free medical centre.

As I said previously, I would love to see the figures, I can't see why it would be happening unless it needed to. Could be completely wrong, but either way cheaper medical centre on campus than off is better than no medical centre if they service itself can be improved upon (I've heard negative things sometimes).

UL_heart_throb

sh1te going to have to pay to get my itchy balls looked at next year? Might have to start wearing rubbers now.

roro1neil0

does the welfare officer actually do ANYTHING?

wnolan1992

yekahS wrote: »

Typical anti-student bias and stereotypes.

With respect, get real. Those that treat college like a holiday camp as you put it rarely last more than a year. You clearly understand nothing about what it's actually like to go to college in a lower-middle income family. If you want to bitch about students, you chose the wrong forum. I suggest you head over here and start a thread about "The Entitled Attitude of Today's Youth" and let those of us that this actually affects discuss the issue in a mature manner.


The charges for doctor/physio/nurse are unfortunate, but I wouldn't personally have a problem with them provided the service is of a high standard. (Fortunately haven't had to use the Medicentre yet, so not sure of it's standard of service)

The charge for STI clinic and Contraceptive Consultation though are pretty disgraceful. Sure, it's only €10, but that could easily be a factor in causing someone to put off going in straight away. I think it's a regressive step in the promotion of sexual health on campus and would really like to know what the SU tried to do to keep these services free.

From the quotes in the article it seems as though they were resigned to the fact that charges were coming in from the outset. Did any negotiations take place whatsoever?

Jester252

Do the pissed off masses know that a lot of services in the center were cut. From the price list some of them will be coming back. The center was down to one nurse who was told to keep students visits to less then 5 mins. We were lucky that UL gave us free medical care. Its not something they have to provide. Yes we pay for services in the reg fee. The fee pays for the libary so people who are saying that we will some pay for them GTFO. It is kinda sad to see people bitch about now having to pay very little in to use the center when they could pay 40-60 in a GP and lets not say how easy it is to have in the Uni. The problem is the fact someone in the SU knew about this. I know that they might not be able to do anything about it but I don't think they got an email today to let them know. I know for a fact that this was in talks from the start of the school year and this doesn't come as a shock to me.

freyners

yekahS wrote: »

freyners wrote: »

disgraceful way to announce it and imo, shows a real lack of respect

How is it a lack of respect?

You should be thanking the university for providing a free service for years. They're still subsidising the cost of seeing a physician for you.

In my opinion the university shouldn't be providing these services at all. Waste of taxpayers money. There are plenty of students with rich mammies and daddies who should be footing the bill when Tommy has a hangover and wants some pills, or when Mary wants to get the morning after pill after a drunken night in the lodge.

Get real folks, the days of the state funding the extravagant lifestyles of pampered students are over.

Next time you try to get all self righteous and start the usual 'pampered students' try to read the full post first.

Because if you had bothered you would see im not bothered about the charge, im concerned about the way it was announced. No discussion, no warning.

Yitzhak Rabin

freyners wrote: »

Next time you try to get all self righteous and start the usual 'pampered students' try to read the full post first.

My apologies.

Fair play to you. Its good that you're willing to stand up and pay your own way and not expect middle class taxpayer's to pay your medical bills. You might teach that roro fella and wnolan a thing or two about civic duty.

sceptre

A few things. Some of them blunt, some of them sharp.

Firstly, it's worth noting that the practice of not charging for visits to the medical centre wasn't introduced in the, er, boom times. It was in place significantly before anyone even thought that the country was undergoing a boom. While I don't know when the medical centre was first opened, it was presumably opened either when or before students lost the automatic right to medical cards, which if memory serves was in 1986 or so. To my knowledge, there has hitherto never been a charge for using the service.

Secondly, this should have been announced to the student body by hook or by crook as soon as it was decided. It must have been decided by last week at the latest. It may have been decided before then. As an issue which affects every student who has ever used or may use the services of the medical centre, waiting on a print delivery to announce it to students is not the way to make such an announcement. The reaction from student representatives (and other, non-elected students) still makes it a good front page and, arguably, a better one. But it should have been announced as soon as the decision was made. It should probably have been announced as soon as it became a possibility.

Thirdly, given that student health should be a concern of the university, any response of "the good times are over" and so forth as a fait accompli justification is a really poor response. The SU may have argued against the introduction of these charges. It may not have. It certainly has in the past when such charges were mooted. Whichever is the case, it should be made clear which was the case and why. That may well be a starting point for some disagreement but that's modern society for you - we got to where we are as a modern society based on disagreements over time and that's why discussion and disagreement are good things.

Fourthly, it is possible that the agreement with student representatives (if there was such an agreement made) to introduce the listed fees for the medical centre was made in a quid pro quo to avoid the alternative of introducing fees for the counselling service. If this is the case, it would be good to have this made clear.

As a corollary to the above, it would be good to know whether or not there are still proposals to introduce fees for the counselling service as a second part to the introduction of fees for the medical service or whether there is a guarantee that these won't be introduced.

Fifthly, it would be quite interesting to know the position of all currently elected SU officers on the introduction of these fees.

Sixthly, it would be even more interesting to know the position of the officers elected for next year on the introduction of these fees. It tends to be a fact that "you agreed to it last year" is a reasonable shutdown defence that the university can offer if next year's officers are against it and that isn't said until next year. Fees introduced tend not to disappear. They tend to remain and to increase.

Seventhly, in 2011, even the long pretence that the student contribution to fees was a "registration charge" to cover core non-tuition expenses was abandoned when it was renamed the annual student contribution. Colleges merely ensure that the stated total costs of the vaguely-defined core services remain at or higher than the total amount received through the student contribution. Rather than being pigeon-holed into specific services, all income is pooled and budgets generated from that. It works that way in every university in Ireland and Ferdinand von Prondzynski explicitly said that in a blog of his from February 2010. Students have already been contributing directly to the costs of the service through the money they're paying annually.

Eightly, basing the logic to charge on the medical centre making an annual loss in recent years is a non-sequitur. A medical centre with associated costs but no specific appointment-related charge will always make a loss. That's a given. It's been so since the day it opened. It's not a new shocker.

Ninthly, it would be useful to know some details of the current operating costs of the medical centre, forecast income as a result of the introduction of the charges (current numbers of usage may or may not remain the same after their introduction but someone has a spreadsheet forecast somewhere in any case) and thence the justification for the particular charges chosen for each of the respective services. Some of these historical details are in the annual UL accounts, though some of those are folded into the financial details for Student Affairs as a whole, which makes them less useful in this case.

Tenthly, all of the above information should have been included with the announcement made to students about the introduction of the charges. It's up to you whether you believe that announcement should have been made by the SU or by the university.

All of the above applies whether or not you're personally in favour of or against the introduction of charges in general or these charges in particular. I haven't even gone near to expressing a view on that as that may be a tomorrow thing and all of the above issues stand separately to that. I'm not doing a "too long; didn't read" version of this post.

JoeCares

My main problem again is how this issue was handled. It seems that half the sabbat team were only informed about this issue.

Why wasn't this issue discussed in detail with other sabbat officers? would one not expect a union wide stance??

How did the union not even try and get the students views on the issue??

What was the starting position of the university and what did the union manage to achieve??

Yes we are in a crap situation financially but the university is one of the most inefficient bodies going. The President, Don, is looking for easy wins to save money. It seems that they have exploited a weak sabbatical team to achieve it.

The University could have made easy saves on ridiculous staffing costs which would easily provide essential services such as STI checks but the Union bid not oppose the actions so the University hammered the nail into the coffin.

I want to hear DEREK DALY on this issue. It is rare that boy is quiet and usually wants to be heard! What does he have to say about the above?

As SU president he is the one accountable and must be held accountable.

Again, please remember i am not anti charges but i am against how and the scale to what it was done. i believe the union failed us big time....

Nockz

My kneejerk reaction to this is that it was delayed because the former sabbats already had enough flack from the student body. They couldn't possibly lay this on us. So instead they wait until after elections, after the decisions have been made. Now we hear the news, but our focus shifts to current sabbats. They were starting on a slope to begin with after the last few years of the SU.

Like I said, that's just my initial reaction. Shame about the charges, I hope it doesn't put people off seeing a doctor when they feel they should. Hopefully the quality of the service will increase as well (more nurses etc).