Student Medical Center to Start Charging

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).

Ginge Young

Sceptre gotta say you opened my eyes on a lot of points, but I do have one question for you.

sceptre wrote: »

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.

I completely agree that it should be a concern of the University, and I agree that our registration fees contribute to the service (as well many other things), but in reality should people be annoyed they have to pay some amount? It is a contribution, that doesn't mean it pays for everything and don't remember it stating anywhere that I would or should always have free GP visits, physio, etc etc.


Like yourself I want to see the figures on everything before I make a proper judgement. That includes usage of the of the medical centre along with a breakdown of all the services that our registration fees help provide for. If that was given out and people could see where the money is going it may make things easier to accept.

Yes being a student is tough on the pocket, but a GP visit is one nights less drinking. It's a small loan from a friend or a family member. I don't see the big deal out of this, unless of course figures are released showing that our registration/contribution fee is more than enough to pay for the services in the medical centre along with all other services provided under it.

Mikel91

Just to throw out 3 points of info.

1.UL is the only University that gives free healthcare services to its students(Excluding Galway,as of the deal done with the university)

2.The Doctor in UL is paid over 100k a year I believe,as well as having several other practices in town(Please correct me if I'm wrong)

3.An alternative proposal was given,being that each student pays a 90 fee on top of their registration(Similar to the 70 that we pay for c&s).
----
Now for the personal touch.

I'm quite pissed off myself tbh as I'd rather not have to pay such an amount for a doctors visit(Being the cheap student that I am,where my priorities are drink & chickenrolls).25 quid is quite hefty all the same though,especially for a doctors visit.Even if brought down to 15...pushing 20 It may have been more acceptable.

That being said though we are the only college besides NUIG offering this service.I would like to see however the rates charged in the other campuses.

wnolan1992

yekahS wrote: »

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.

If you would kindly read my posts, rather than continuing with your frankly blinkered view of students, you'd see I don't have a problem with charges for doctor/nurse/physio. My problems with this were:

a) The Announcement: The SU knew about this last week AT THE LATEST, yet they kept it quiet in order for An Focal to have this big story on the front page as last issue. If I have to explain why this is completely inappropriate and unnacceptable then I weep for humanity.

b) The Charges for Psychiatric Consultation: While there may be an argument for it, in my personal opinion the University should provide this free of charge to it's students. A moral issue I know.

c) The Charges for Contraceptive Advice and STI Clinic: Given that these services can and are being provided free of charge off campus, I see no justification to charge for them on campus. It serves as nothing more than a disincentive to look after your sexual health. We can argue all we want that it's only a nominal charge, but (if you'll allow me to be crude for a minute) if it's a choice for Jimmy to pay to check out that irritating little itchy feeling, or grab a chicken roll in Spar to cure the hangover from the night before, given your opinion of students what do you think will be the outcome?


TL;DR: Read my posts before accusing me of not knowing anything about civic duty.

bentoverhard

I refrain from commenting on SU crap, although the last year has seen me more and more annoyed by the sabbat team.

This however seems to be the last straw.

What an absolute disgrace of a sabbatical team.

It seems they have literally bent over and got absolutely rode and seem to have enjoyed the process.

Kelly O brien is an absolute disgrace. taking glee in the fact that she would have an expose to put in an focal. refusing to announce what this expose was for weeks, keeping it all under wraps just so she could make her paper interesting. word to the wise kelly, no one gives a **** about a paper that's two weeks behind current affairs in this day and age (although I guess in this instance you finally figured out a way to make your news current, by just suppressing it)

i'm absolutely appalled. Derek Daly Aoife kenny and kelly o brien have sold the students down the river. daly's term in office has been nothing short of abysmal. every step of the turn this year he has screwed over the common joe soap student. he should be absolutely ashamed of himself, the decisions he took, and the sabbat team that he was meant to be in charge of.

this latest decision is inexcusable.

this sabbat team is one of the most cowardly yellow bellied bunch of people to have ever represented the students.

spent more time all year arguing with each other and less time arguing with the university on behalf of students.

The SU officers need to hang their heads in shame.

will be glad to see the back of them.

the rumour is that rockett tara and sarah were kept completely in the dark about this???

if this is true then it's safe that the others are a fucking menace to the union

I'd be interested to hear the opinions of mousy, rockett and the other guy on this. will they take a stand now against the university? or will they bury their heads in the sand and pop up next year saying ''ah sure it was daly who did that nothing to do with me sorry''

kflynn

I can understand the charges to a point but need a bit of clarification. I thought it wasn't a GP service, in that he can't give prescriptions?

Second, I would really like to see some reform and accountability for the center. The service at times can be absolutely unacceptable.

touts

A University is there to provide education. That is its core function! Anything else the taxpayer (through the University administration) chooses to provide is an added bonus. If something has to be cut let it be the added bonus and not the core activity of education.

Why are people objecting to paying for medical care and not for say food in the Canteen or Accommodation on campus. If you are now going to fight for the perceived right to Medical care then I suggest you look at the hierarchy of needs and you should first insist that we provide free food and free shelter. If you genuinely cannot afford food and shelter there is a grant scheme to help you. Likewise if you genuinely cannot afford medical care there is the medical card to help you. If you can afford to pay for these things then pay for them.

The real world owes you nothing yet we give you an education and heavily subsidise many other services you take for granted. Bit of gratitude would be nice!

cjthecrow

Hey Guys,

Cathal Ronan, Welfare Elect here.

First and foremost I think the method of delivery of such big news was ridiculous. Such a huge issue as this which effects a huge amount of students should have been brought to students much earlier instead of out of the blue.
I will be meeting with Tara today/tomorrow to discuss the issue as I need to get more information on this.
From a personal point of view it really is a shame to see such an action take place as it does effect a considerable amount of people on campus. Money is tight and adding more costs on to the shoulders of students is never good. I will try my utmost best to prevent this action.
In saying that, we have to be realistic, if the funds aren't there, they aren't there. As I said money is tight, that goes for both us students but also the university itself. If this decision is set in stone then I will hope to achieve an alternate method of payment such as maybe a one lump sum at the beginning of the year or leaving nurses free and let them decide the seriousness of the situation to see if a doctor is needed or not. Of course I welcome all constructive ideas from you, the students.

I have been doing a bit of research looking at other colleges in the country and these are the figures I can find on their websites.
http://www.ucd.ie/stuhealth/chargesforstudenthealth/
UCD - Full charges on medical centre

http://www.ucc.ie/en/studenthealth/fees/
UCC - Full charges on medical centre

http://www.nuigalway.ie/student-life/student-support/medical-services.html
NUIG - Doctors, nurses and psychiatrists are free of charge but physio, sexual health clinic and vaccinations are not.

http://www4.dcu.ie/students/health/health_service_charges.shtml
DCU - Full charges but cheaper then the others.

http://www.misu.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60&Itemid=67
Mary I - The Medical Centre provides a service for students with Acute Illnesses the rest have to see their own GPs.

http://www.tcd.ie/collegehealth/service/fees.php
Trinity - They don't charge per Doctor visit but rather on what treatment from as far as I can see.

As I said I am a bit in the dark about everything as I am still a student and I haven't had time to talk to Tara so I hope my lack of knowledge on this current issue is understandable.

Kind Regards,

Cathal Ronan.

Cossax

Just got an email about a SU survey on this. Comical really.

I should say I'm no longer a student so this doesn't really have an impact on me but I do think the handling of this has been appalling.

Nockz

Cossax wrote: »

Just got an email about a SU survey on this. Comical really.

I should say I'm no longer a student so this doesn't really have an impact on me but I do think the handling of this has been appalling.

Would you rather they didn't ask for your opinion?

Edit: Is it fair to assume that any action the SU takes on such matters is the work of the new sabbats?

Popoutman

yekahS wrote: »

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.

Speaking as someone that is very probably earning more than you in a real job, and paying a lot of cash personally to attend college at the same time as paying the normal amount of tax from the paychecque, I take offense at your statements and I also think that you are well out of line. As a moderator you would be amongst the first to take note when a troll would come along, yet you show yourself up to be not much better based on your unwarranted generalisations.

As for myself, I certainly do feel entitled to get an adequate set of services for my fees that I have paid, there's nothing wrong with that - I am after all a paying customer of the University's.

Another thing that is worth noting.. Given that the college is doing a medical course, would it not make sense to use the on-campus medical facilities and the student population as a teching tool for the postgrad medical students? It would do no harm to give some of these medical student a taste of the real medical world - it may allow the weeding out of those that are not capable of dealing with real people (and I know of at least one that shouldn't be let near a real patient).