Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
14-04-2019, 22:48   #16
One eyed Jack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 11,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurtosis View Post
We already have a system where time to access treatment is based on ability to pay rather than medical need, which is scandalous enough. And you genuinely want there to be extra advantages for the wealthy? I'm glad most of our political parties disagree and have a strategy to move away from this two tier system.

I didn’t read anywhere in the post you quoted where the poster suggested there should be extra advantages for the wealthy? There should be extra advantages for people who are willing to pay privately for their own healthcare, a system which our political parties are trying to make everyone move towards by putting additional levies on people who only choose to take out private health insurance in later life, in an attempt to make people take out private health insurance when they’re younger.

One of the benefits private health insurance providers are able to offer to their customers is earlier access to innovative treatments. It’s not unfair when the person is paying for it, that’s how insurance works!

Whether or not the Minister for Health decides to approve the early intervention treatments for public patients is entirely up to him, but simply suggesting it’s “unfair” that the treatments aren’t available on the public dime when it’s not cost-effective to do so, that’s not unfair when it’s exactly what people who choose to pay for private health insurance are paying for!
One eyed Jack is offline  
Advertisement
14-04-2019, 23:05   #17
Kurtosis
Moderator
 
Kurtosis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,384
OEJ, lifetime community rating was introduced in 2014, when the government's policy was to introduce universal health insurance. Since then, there's been cross-party agreement on the Sltecare strategy, to introduce universal health care and move away from the two tier system.

I don't think access and timeliness of access to health care should be based on ability to pay, rather it should be based on medical need. I think it is extremely unfair that money should allow one to jump the queue when it comes to medical treatment.
Kurtosis is offline  
14-04-2019, 23:30   #18
One eyed Jack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 11,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurtosis View Post
I don't think access and timeliness of access to health care should be based on ability to pay, rather it should be based on medical need. I think it is extremely unfair that money should allow one to jump the queue when it comes to medical treatment.

I get what you’re saying, but the provision of medicine can’t just be based upon medical need, as it has to be paid for. That’s why we have bodies like NCPE and why the Orkambi fiasco was just that - the HSE simply can’t afford it, and it was an entirely politically motivated decision to pay for it.

You keep saying that it’s unfair that when someone pays for better medical treatment that they have access to better medical treatment. In my view it would be unfair if people who weren’t willing to pay for private health care were able to access the same level of healthcare as those who have chosen to pay for it with insurance premiums.

How does it sound fair to you that someone who has never paid for private health insurance would receive the same standard of healthcare as someone who has always paid their insurance premiums just in case they ever needed to avail of private healthcare?

It’s not really jumping the queue, it’s paying for a better healthcare service than is offered by the public health system. I know that these practices are putting the Minister for Health over a barrel in a time when there are many people who expect all sorts without having to pay for it, but simply calling it “unfair” should never have the Minister reverse the decision not to pay over the odds for medical treatments when it isn’t economically viable to pay for them from the public purse, because that’s unfair - now not only am I paying more for some politicians idea of socialised medicine, I’m also still paying for private health insurance too. That’s unfair.
One eyed Jack is offline  
14-04-2019, 23:31   #19
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 118
Money talks in this country. Simple as that.
Pretty Polky is offline  
14-04-2019, 23:37   #20
soupandpoitin
Registered User
 
soupandpoitin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 94
Why the hell would you pay for private healthcare if there was zero advantage to it?

I'd be quite happy to stop paying for healthcare if the public system was better as it's not cheap.
soupandpoitin is offline  
Advertisement
14-04-2019, 23:38   #21
soupandpoitin
Registered User
 
soupandpoitin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Polky View Post
Money talks in this country. Simple as that.
In every country.
soupandpoitin is offline  
15-04-2019, 00:08   #22
steddyeddy
Registered User
 
steddyeddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewolf View Post
what do we know about the drugs? the IT suggests they may not work
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/heal...fair-1.3860348
i wonder if this is a price gouging exercise for vhi rather than an actual useful drug not being funded by the hse. if it is the latter, they should be told to get on it asap
It says they may not work for some people and work great for others. This is like a lot of drugs. Depending on your genotype you'll metabolize drugs differently. Some people do well on anti-depressents while some don't for example. Also these drugs are for late stage cancers where you really need to try anything you can. It would be the difference between life and death.
steddyeddy is offline  
15-04-2019, 08:15   #23
A Tyrant Named Miltiades!
Alexa, Play Liveline
 
A Tyrant Named Miltiades!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 7,417
Mod: Radio, ZTest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitches Be Trypsin View Post
Clickbait article.

I do believe though that having private health insurance should have some perks besides faster treatment and private rooms. Paying people should get superior treatment imo.
I'd have no problem with that, if private healthcare weren't already subsidised through the HSE and tax rebates for health insurance.

If you want better treatment pay for it all yourself.

As far as I'm concerned, the current model of health insurance should only be for increased comfort and perhaps slightly faster access to elective procedures.

Last edited by A Tyrant Named Miltiades!; 15-04-2019 at 10:27.
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! is offline  
(4) thanks from:
15-04-2019, 09:05   #24
WeIrishareEvil
Banned
 
WeIrishareEvil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by steddyeddy View Post
Oncologists will now be only able to prescribe new potentially life saving cancer drugs to private patients. I think this is pretty scummy to be honest. Nobody pays the full cost of medical treatment/research and I think it's really a false ideology to say some people "earn" the right to more healthcare than a poorer person.

"Medical oncologist John Crown said he welcomes the move for VHI customers but is "personally very troubled by it".

He said: "For the first time since I can ever recall, we have a difference in access to cancer drugs between public and private patients. It's completely unfair. It's going to be extraordinarily difficult now."

RTE doing a Daily Express here. Article says nothing. Nothing at all.
WeIrishareEvil is offline  
Advertisement
15-04-2019, 09:42   #25
BattleCorp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by paddy19 View Post
The real question, as highlighted by professor Crown, is what the hell VHI are at.

The VHI have no expertise in evaluating cancer drugs.

The drug companies use vulnerable cancer patients to try to blackmail higher prices from the taxpayer.

They are helped by the media who think we should base drug approval based on patients experience rather than scientific data.
You do realise that these are proper drugs and have been tested and cleared for use. You are making it sound like the drugs haven't been evaluated. They have been cleared for use by the HPRA (Medicines Board).

The VHI are an insurance company. They should have nothing to do with evaluating cancer drugs as they are unqualified to do that.

Your gripe should be with the Government because the VHI are willing to pay for these drugs but the Government are not (yet).

I will agree with you that these drugs are very very expensive but developing and testing drugs is a ridiculously expensive thing to do.
BattleCorp is online now  
Thanks from:
15-04-2019, 09:45   #26
mariaalice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,963
Its slightly click bait, the HSE does offer the drugs in some cases, however, the VHI is giving the consultant the option of prescribing it for any case they see fit.
mariaalice is offline  
15-04-2019, 09:55   #27
Hobosan
Registered User
 
Hobosan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 114
I use €500 notes as plasters. Not even the best health insurance on the market can offer that service.
Hobosan is offline  
Thanks from:
15-04-2019, 09:57   #28
ashes2014
Registered User
 
ashes2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 30
I am afraid that this practice will become more and more common.

The public healthcare system will get worse and worse and we will all have to pay for private healthcare out of fear.
ashes2014 is offline  
Thanks from:
15-04-2019, 10:23   #29
steddyeddy
Registered User
 
steddyeddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeIrishareEvil View Post
RTE doing a Daily Express here. Article says nothing. Nothing at all.
I linked two articles in this. The "nothing at all" people are proclaiming is based on an inability to look up further information or understand the facts involved.
steddyeddy is offline  
15-04-2019, 10:26   #30
steddyeddy
Registered User
 
steddyeddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20,574
The British newspaper the Times are also weighing in on it.

Quote:
The former director-general of the HSE has described a two-tier drugs treatment system for cancer patients as “terrible” and said it will have a far-reaching impact.

Last week oncologists learnt that certain cancer drugs known to help people with breast cancer and melanoma would be made available to patients with health insurance from VHI Healthcare. In a letter the insurer said it would provide its patients with access to the breast cancer drug Pertuzumab (perjeta) and immunotherapies such as Tecentriq (atezolizumab), Keytruda (pembrolizumab) and Opdivo (nivolumab).
steddyeddy is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet