New Medical Centre Charges from 31st January 2013

wnolan1992

So this was posted on Facebook earlier, a list of the existing charges and the new ones which will come into effect from tomorrow.

Link.




Good to see the psychiatrist is now no charge so fair play to the SU who negotiated that (according to FB pages), but a bit disappointing to see the charges for STI clinic and contraception remain.

Thoughts?

Ginge Young

Any reductions are great. Apparently people don't mind paying the €30 for the contraceptive clinic (based off of surveys I'm guessing). I still maintain the University isn't there to provide free healthcare, so I think the SU have done a great job negotiating these reductions. The I Grade in particular is a great one.

Jester252

The guys on the SU facebook page can never seem to be happy

lkionm

How come TST had time to creep on facebook and give us awful drivel lately about a comment no one cares about and money saving tips, when they could have reported on this?

Maybe a thread worthy of its own of how they are turning into a tabloid.

Ginge Young

lkionm wrote: »

How come TST had time to creep on facebook and give us awful drivel lately about a comment no one cares about and money saving tips, when they could have reported on this?

Maybe a thread worthy of its own of how they are turning into a tabloid.

How about that is left to thread already in existence to discuss it and this one is used to discuss the medical centre charges, as it was originally intended?

J_E

Disappointing that STI clinic charges in a higher-risk environment aren't low cost or free. I can see people chancing their luck rather than forking out €30 for what might be nothing. I personally think that's more important than a psychiatrist being free. (That doesn't mean I am belittling the importance of mental health)

Jester252

Cydoniac wrote: »

Disappointing that STI clinic charges in a higher-risk environment aren't low cost or free. I can see people chancing their luck rather than forking out €30 for what might be nothing. I personally think that's more important than a psychiatrist being free. (That doesn't mean I am belittling the importance of mental health)

Well in a university more people are likely to get stressed out then get an STD

ninty9er

The psychiatrist charge was the one that was most vocally opposed from the outset.

Well done to the Union.

J_E

Jester252 wrote: »

Well in a university more people are likely to get stressed out then get an STD

Okay, but it can be worse in cases where a person decides to give the clinic a miss on the basis of price, and potentially unknowingly infects other students. A condom won't protect you from everything. I know this seems like the case of someone wanting it all but I think a balance could have been made here.

Subutai

Cydoniac wrote: »

Okay, but it can be worse in cases where a person decides to give the clinic a miss on the basis of price, and potentially unknowingly infects other students. A condom won't protect you from everything. I know this seems like the case of someone wanting it all but I think a balance could have been made here.

I agree that STI clinic charges are something of a pain for students, however I think it really is a great deal more important that the Psychiatrist charge was removed completely. There are already numerous social barriers to seeking help with issues relating to mental help. Those are just as, if not more, strong in a university environment. Whereas the social barriers to seeking treatment for an STI are somewhat diminished in University, given that there is an attitude of "sure, now's the time to be doing it anyway".
Furthermore the consequences for not getting your mental health seen to are likely to be far more damaging. STIs are, thankfully, not a large killer of young people, suicide however is.

Kudos to the SU for having the ability to get that charge removed, it's an achievement they should be proud of. Hopefully they can work something out with STI clinics as time goes on.

Ginge Young

Cydoniac wrote: »

Okay, but it can be worse in cases where a person decides to give the clinic a miss on the basis of price, and potentially unknowingly infects other students. A condom won't protect you from everything. I know this seems like the case of someone wanting it all but I think a balance could have been made here.

While the medical centre is fantastic, a great resource I still maintain that it is not the responsibility of the University to provide any of these services for free. It was amazing that they did so for such a long time.

People with different opinions are always going to say it would be one over the other, I'm just happy reductions have been gotten for some of the services. Regardless of whether your a student or not people have to look after themselves, there is only so much you can do. If somebody won't go to an STI clinic because it costs as much as a night out it is up to them to decide what they want to do.

For anyone who is seriously in need of money for anything - I don't know about anyone else - but I have always been able to ask someone for a loan for it and pay back.

I mean, it would be great if things were free again but I think the work the SU has done to this point has been done well and as far as I am aware it was negotiated off the back of surveys that were filled out by students as to what they would be willing to pay for/what they would like to see reduced.

sigmund.jung

Ginge Young wrote: »

While the medical centre is fantastic, a great resource I still maintain that it is not the responsibility of the University to provide any of these services for free. It was amazing that they did so for such a long time.

Do you think the counselling service should not be free?

Ginge Young

sigmund.jung wrote: »

Do you think the counselling service should not be free?

The counselling service does not fall under the medical centre and is free as far as I am aware and should remain so. Declan Aherne and the rest of the counselling team do an amazing job for what they have.

sigmund.jung

Why do you think the counselling service should be free but not physio / medical / STI / psych? How do you logically come to that conclusion?

Ginge Young

Sorry I should clarify, I am not against the medical centre services being free, I never said that, what I said is I do not feel it is the responsibility of a University to provide them for free. I think they try to when they can to help students but it is not their responsibility, I believe to provide it.

In terms of wanting the counselling service to remain free I mean that in terms of preferring it to be free over any of the services in the medical if there was a choice in the matter.

sigmund.jung

so it's not the responsibility of the university to provide counselling for free?

Slugs

Cydoniac wrote: »

Disappointing that STI clinic charges in a higher-risk environment aren't low cost or free. I can see people chancing their luck rather than forking out €30 for what might be nothing. I personally think that's more important than a psychiatrist being free. (That doesn't mean I am belittling the importance of mental health)

I think in general, people (and students in particular) are going to chance their arm with any medical issue if it means having to pay...

sigmund.jung wrote: »

so it's not the responsibility of the university to provide counselling for free?

No it isn't. And yet they do...

sigmund.jung

I just think it's worth noting that someone like Ginge Young doesn't think Medical services or counsellings services are the remit of the university. If someone like himself, who I would have thought was fairly protective and supportive of student focused facilities, would be happy to see them privatised, what can we say about previous capitalist led SU presidents. Is the current situation a product of financial restrictions due to budget cuts, or cumulative effects of an apathetic and capitalist SU.

Imagine you're paying these guys to represent you, advocate for you, defend you but they actually don't believe in any of it. Shocking and frankly quite disturbing.

Slugs

sigmund.jung wrote: »

I just think it's worth noting that someone like Ginge Young doesn't think Medical services or counsellings services are the remit of the university. If someone like himself, who I would have thought was fairly protective and supportive of student focused facilities, would be happy to see them privatised, what can we say about previous capitalist led SU presidents. Is the current situation a product of financial restrictions due to budget cuts, or cumulative effects of an apathetic and capitalist SU.

Imagine you're paying these guys to represent you, advocate for you, defend you but they actually don't believe in any of it. Shocking and frankly quite disturbing.

Despite the fact Ginge Young is a vocal member of C&S, he is not in fact an SU president and therefore his opinions really are not comparable with previous SU presidents or even previous Sabbatical officers as they (his opinions) do not wield any authority (No offence intended Ginge!).

From my understanding, is it not the university that provides the services? If this is indeed the case, what effect does having a capitalist SU in power have on the matter?

Unfortunately, I've had to deal with the fact that people are representing and advocating (but not defending) my "interests" in the public sphere for a long time without an iota of interest in my well being other than seeking a profit and will continue to do so... Although it doesn't sting as much as when I first became aware of it, it still hurts.

On a brighter note, it's good to see that the SU has negotiated to cut medical centre costs.

Well done lads!