BS: NHS treating drunks

Subject: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Nigel Paterson
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:35 AM

According to a piece on BBC news recently, it costs the National Health Service approximately £200.00 to look after/treat an intoxicated person in A&E. If that individual has ended up in Accident & Emergency entirely as a result of their excessive, irresponsible drinking, isn't it about time these individuals were billed for their care?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:39 AM

You do know what "thin end of the wedge" means, right?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:46 AM

Yes, Richard ~~ & that could be said of any change in any direction for any purpose...

Nigel is right. It is perverse & wilful & entirely voluntary to reduce oneself to a helpless state of drunkenness & there is no reason whatever why those with the sense to control their drinking & keep it within reasonable bounds should pay for the excesses of the halfwits who won't.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:47 AM

Inded.
Smokers. Fat people. Skiiers. Equestrians....

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Mr Happy
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:48 AM

Oh, drat! - I thought it was some sort of special offer!

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:53 AM

Not all comparable, Keith. You are doing a bit of devil's advocacy here. Skiers do not intend to have accidents on the slopes but have occasional misfortunes. Likewise, mutatis mutandis, equestrians. Some people just have a metabolism which induces fatness.

But smokers, like over-drinkers, are wilfully indulging in an activity which they know to be intrinsically deleterious, which brings its own inevitable disagreeable consequences of which they are aware before they decide to indulge in it. And they should pay.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:59 AM

Do any drinkers intend to get hospitalised?
More than skiers?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 06:09 AM

Yes. The intention is in the excess. A drinker who doesn't know his own limits and stay within them is making himself liable to self-induced harm; and knows it from the off.

You are usually more clear-thinking than this, I think, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Jack Campin
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 06:10 AM

The proportion of people going on skiing holidays who break a limb is far higher than the proportion of people going out to get drunk who end up in A&E. And skiers know the risks - simply counting the legs in casts on the plane back tells them all they need to know. These are not "occasional misfortunes", they are a routine part of every day on the slopes. They know damn well what they're costing the rest of us.

Economically appropriate treatment would be to simply tie their legs up any old how in burlap and send them out on trolleys to beg.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Will Fly
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 06:31 AM

Before we start pronouncing judgement on the poor buggers who, for whatever reason, can't control their use of alcohol, it might be worth reading this in full:

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Will Fly
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 06:32 AM

Finger slipped...

Alcoholism and alcohol abuse

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 06:33 AM

I doubt whether any English speakers intend to get "hospitalised".

It's an idea from the worst Victorian excesses, another step down the road to dividing all in any sort of need into "deserving" or "undeserving".

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 06:46 AM

For once, I have to agree with Richard.
If any of the naysayers found themselves in A&E, being a bit wobbly after having had a few drinks, would they volunteer to pay for their treatment?
Thought not.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 07:02 AM

If the behaviour of a hospitalised drunk is abusive and threatening to medical staff and everyone else around him/her then yes there should be a charge.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 07:03 AM

isn't it about time these individuals were billed for their care?

No, it is not. For those who arrive in A & E because they are alcoholics I think it is worth reminding people that addiction is an illness and people who are unfortunate enough to have an addictive illness deserve the same care and respect as people with any other illness.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: MikeL2
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 07:05 AM

hi

Having played rugby at a high level for many years like many of my team-mates I was no stranger to A&E on a Saturday night.

Obviously we we always treated but there was always a certain amount of " self-inflicted injury" in the minds of some of the staff.

Of course serious injuries were given the correct priorities but lesser ones sometimes were deliberately kept waiting longer than others who had come later for treatment.

Around that time there were suggestions from Government that this kind of treatment should be charged for. Happily this did not receive any real backing.

Recently I spent quite a bit of time visiting hospital to see my brother-in-law. During this time he spent some time in a ward that contained some patients being treated for alcohol excess.

It seemed that some of these were habitual "offenders". The patients were extremely difficult to handle and certainly did not appreciate the staff that were trying to help them. Nor did it help "real" patients who were genuinely ill. In theses case I see no reason why there could not be some charge for this.

It may help the patients to realise that what they are doing is a drain on the resources of the NHS and the money may well have more effect to help these people to curtail their drinking.

I do see "the thin end of the wedge argument but something has to be done.

Cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Silas
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 07:08 AM

OK. Lets charge fat people. And thin ones - eating disorders are self inflicted after all. Lung cancer - smokers, they should be charged. Car drivers who are at fault for their accidents, jay walkers, childbirth - if thats not self inflicted I don't know what is....




Jeezee

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: TheSnail
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 07:13 AM

Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 09:26 AM

In fact, Snail, Malvolio had the right of it on that particular occasion, even if he could be a pompous old fart; he only put himself in the wrong by mistaking Maria's reason for her presence in the cellar and unfairly accusing her of complicity in the disgusting behaviour that was occurring. Sir Toby was nothing but an exploitative pain-in-the-arse, living parasitically on his niece and deceitfully sponging on Sir Andrew. Not sure whom your question is aimed at, or precisely what is the point you intend by it; but I don't think its origin or antecedence is likely to be of much support to your argument, whatever it may be.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: jacqui.c
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 10:12 AM

Car drivers who are at fault for their accidents

There is already a charge against their Insurer for hospital treatment - that was coming in when I was working in motor claims.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 11:15 AM

If a charge were introduced, many drunks would avoid going to hospital. (or their mates would avoid taking them there or calling an ambulance) This might result in deaths. Self-inflicted (for whatever reason) medical problems are still medical problems. What if a drunk arrived and it was discovered he/she couldn't pay? Would they chuck them out on the street? But it might be an idea to have special units for such cases, to free up A&E departments a bit. These special units could poss have more security staff, and trained advisors to help tackle the addiction if necess. The trouble is, many drunks have also sustained injuries and need a proper A&E.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: TheSnail
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 11:22 AM

MtheGM

Sir Toby was nothing but an exploitative pain-in-the-arse

Indeed so but probably good company and, it would seem, redeemed by Maria's love rather than Malvolio's virtuous efforts.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 12:03 PM

Good company in the Oh-wotta-character fashion, which has always been one that gets on my tits; but I recognise that not everyone thinks as I do about that...

LoL

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 12:25 PM

Falstaff would have been bankrupt...

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Nigel Paterson
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 01:02 PM

A few random observations from a personal point of view, speaking as one who 'battled with the demon drink' from age 16 until 35 & has clung to sobriety for the subsequent 39 years.

Are all binge drinkers alcoholics? No, but the possibility of addiction/habituation is ever present.

Will all binge drinkers permanently damage their liver? No, the liver self-repairs, but only up to a point.

Is Cirrhosis of the Liver found in increasingly younger people, both male & female? Yes.

Addiction, habituation & binge are not synonyms.

Am I still addicted to alcohol? Yes, I just don't drink the stuff!

Do intoxicated people require treatment? Yes, there is a risk of death if they are left unattended.

Is all this placing an enormous strain on NHS Staff & resources? Unequivocally Yes.

Charging for treatment/care following a 'bender' MIGHT replenish the coffers a little. It MIGHT deter a few individuals from becoming repeat binge drinkers. It DOESN'T address the underlying question which is: "Why are so many people, in so many cities across the UK, indulging in this potentially self-destructive behaviour?"
                                                                                           Nigel.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 02:58 PM

Ask the government - they are a major reason. And trying to duck the tab.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 03:08 PM

Nigel, I have asked myself the same question, ie Why do countless people do this all over the country? Especially young people. My two nieces are at University, and seem to live to get hopelessly drunk as often as possible. They drink before they go out,(one in Durham and one in Edinburgh) they drink in the pubs and clubs, they drink on the way home. They get in at dawn, practically paralytic, with plans to go out and do it all again. They are often terribly sick and feel ghastly for a day or so. I dread what this is doing to their livers, and I wonder what they get up to while in this state, they're both so vulnerable, aged 20 and 21. Their mother is a doctor, but she can't persuade them to ease up. I was at Edinburgh Uni, and I swear we didn't do this. What is the matter with them?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 03:22 PM

Don't charge them, enroll them in an education and treatment program. But if they do not attend, fine them.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Howard Jones
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 03:27 PM

The simple answer is that being drunk is fun, because it releases their inhibitions. But only for a while, then it becomes horrible. Most people, eventually, start to realise that it is possible still to have fun without feeling horrible afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Jeri
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 05:49 PM

Also fine the people who need health care because they smoke, drive without seat belts, testing and driving, doing ANYTHING while driving except driving, eat a lot or fat, or salt, or sugar, are overweight, refuse vaccinations, get into fights because they're a-holes, don't lift heavy objects properly, listen to loud music...

I think almost everything is preventable, but how many pet hates are you going to cater to?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 06:44 PM

Totally specious crap!

In the UK at least, we have a welfare system which takes care of people who need treatment, no matter the reason for that need, and that is exactly how it should continue.

Medical staff undoubtedly have opinions about those who willfully make themselves ill, but they are not Judges or Jurors and should not be expected to act as such.

Their purpose is, and should remain, the treatment of the sick without fear or favour.


""Ask the government - they are a major reason. And trying to duck the tab.""

Richard, do you seriously suggest that binge drinking etc only started since May 2010, or are you just slinging mud for the fun of it.?

Two minutes research would make you look a total fool, if I could be arsed to bother.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: gnu
Date: 11 Jan 12 - 08:38 PM

"I'm okay Jack."? Good lord! There, but for the grace of God, go I... YOU.

I hope you have LOTS of coin and can buy friends and health care when you need it because, with that attitude, I suspect yer gonna need coin if YOU ever get sick and need help.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 12:17 AM

Richard, "blame the government"? Really?
I'd be more likely to blame Tesco.

The young people I work with don't get pissed in the pub or club - they get pissed at home, on the dirt-cheap booze they get from the local supermarket, then they go out at 11-30 pm, a time of night I used to be staggering home from the pub to bed when I was a young drinker, to hit the pubs and clubs for the last couple (just to top the job off and look out for a pick-up, so to speak).

IMHO, there needs to be a joined-up policy of education/rehabilitation, perhaps court-enforced (same as there needs to be for drug-abusers), price-control-legislation on all alcohol sales (including supermarkets - stop the loss-leader culture), a return to controlled licensed hours (the link between the abandonment of controlled opening and the increase in alcohol abuse is absolutely clear, only a complete idiot would deny it), control of advertising, and a culture-change in the media where alcohol abuse is constantly glamourised.

I don't believe that all young binge-drinkers are addicted to alcohol, but I do believe they are, in a way, addicted to an image of a lifestyle that's rammed down their throats as being desirable, glamourous and "dangerous" in a "non-harmful" way - that it's somehow 'clever' and 'attractive' to behave that way. Young people are impressionable, and they are being given entirely the wrong impression by the media, and by advertisers, who should know better.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 12:24 AM

And treatment on the NHS is free to all, at the point of delivery. It's the basic, founding principle of the service. The moment we start charging people for treatment on the basis that, by their behaviour or lifestyle, they somehow 'asked for it', that basic founding principle will be blown away and the NHS will be no more.....we will be on the slippery slope towards a private health-care system.

Does anyone in their right mind really want that?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 04:18 AM

Don - I was about to agree with you until your government remark. I think I detect more hopelessness now than ever before. I think that that is what many are running away from into the arms of alcohol (even though you and I both quite like alcohol anyway).

And I am wholly clear that this new hopelessness is the fault of this government, which can turn round the day after the House of Lords (hardly a bastion of socialism) savages government attempts to steal from the worst off in society, and without even pause to examine its conscience if any announces plans to reverse the Lords' improvements to the Welfare Bill.

Well, Backwoodsman, scrapping the NHS appears to be exactly what this government is planning. Although if you imply that this government is not in its right mind I will agree.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 04:28 AM

"Why are so many people, in so many cities across the UK, indulging in this potentially self-destructive behaviour?"

Nigel,
I think you've answered your own question. It's the phrase "potentially self-destructive behaviour?" everyone thinks it can't happen to them.

To quote from a Johnny Cash parody that I posted elsewhere:

To drink's a very very easy thing to do,
I'm sure I'm sober when the evenings through.
Though early on I may have 'called for Hugh'
Just one more time,
I'll walk the line.

Cheers
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 04:43 AM

Weren't we once warned about "Lies, damned lies, and statistics".
Let's go back to the original posting :-
According to a piece on BBC news recently, it costs the National Health Service approximately £200.00 to look after/treat an intoxicated person in A&E.

My questions would be

Who says it costs £200 to treat a drunk?

Why do they claim that is what it costs?

What do they say it costs to treat someone they have not classed as "a drunk"?

Do the figures distinguish between someone who is there for a reason not caused by them being drunk? Perhaps they were a passenger in a car accident? Mugged? Slipped on the same patch of ice as the sober patient on the next seat?

Does it cost the same to treat a drunk with a minor wound which needs disinfecting then holding together with a couple of "butterfly" sticking plasters compared with someone hit by a bus, with serious injuries, broken bones and needing surgery? I think not!

Is the figure for "How Much It Costs" based on Total cost for Staff Wages + Heating/Lighting + Rent being paid to the firm who built the new PFI funded building (and whatever hospital outgoings the accountants might add) then Divided by the number of patients seen in one shift?
If so - it is a spurious calculation. The fixed costs are EXACTLY THE SAME whether there is one patient or 200 in the same time slot. I suspect that if you remove these from any calculation of treatment costs, the cost which is due to the actual individual patient (drunk or sober) is in most cases a tiny fraction of any sum quoted by the accountants.

Quack!
GtD.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Musket
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 04:54 AM

I have been involved in these types of discussion before, wearing my real hat, rather than the luxury of Mudcat "say whatever comes into your head, or say in order to wind someone up."

I tended to give the example of a travellers' campsite near the village I used to live. Some Daily M*il type breather noted that we were sending health visitors into the campsite and demanded we stop wasting his tax payer's money on those who opt out of society; let them see the consequences of opting out.

Other than the obvious bits about children neither opting in or out, I pointed out that Tuberculosis was a high risk of incidence disease amongst the travellers, and even if you couldn't bring yourself to helping those in need, at least accept that these travellers visited the same shops, pubs etc as you and we are protecting you as well as them by monitoring and offering health information.

Ok Mather, there's a brick wall. See what it knows about War and Peace.

Related to this thread, Don points out that healthcare professionals will try to treat whatever slides or crawls through the door without fear nor favour, or words to that effect. Too true.

But also, in stabilising drunks, they are also keeping them from being a danger to themselves or others. Plus, trying to sort them at that stage is far cheaper to the beloved tax payer than the slow slide of failing health that accompanies long term addiction. Some people are rather ashamed after their first stomach pump, and rarely end up joining the A&E frequent flyers club.

Oh, and protecting staff is of paramount priority. Police will and do deal with aggressive drunks and charges are brought, regardless of what you may read.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 04:56 AM

Nice summary Mr Duck, however, I can't agree one point:
If so - it is a spurious calculation. The fixed costs are EXACTLY THE SAME whether there is one patient or 200 in the same time slot. I suspect that if you remove these from any calculation of treatment costs, the cost which is due to the actual individual patient (drunk or sober) is in most cases a tiny fraction of any sum quoted by the accountants
If there were a lot less patients we would need less hospitals & less staff, so the fixed costs would reduce. As such it is reasonable to apportion those costs when evaluating the cost of treating a patient.

Cheers! (my usual salutation, but probably not the most suitable in view of the subject matter)
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:00 AM

"Well, Backwoodsman, scrapping the NHS appears to be exactly what this government is planning. Although if you imply that this government is not in its right mind I will agree

On the first point, I fear you may well be right, Richard. A former Tory government wrought havoc by selling off a good percentage of our council-housing stock, clearing the way for private landlords to make fortunes guaranteed by our benefits system, whilst huge numbers still go homeless, so why wouldn't this one sell the NHS out from under our feet? But I'd like to think that Cameron, at least, has more humanity in him than that. I hope so.

On the second point(and bear in mind that, in terms of personal political philosophy, I'm closer to you than I am to Don), I don't think this government is necessarily any worse than the past three or four - all driven and controlled by big-business paymasters, all toeing whatever party-line is in vogue at the time. Which, thinking a step further, may negate my above statement of hope regarding Cameron's humanity.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:03 AM

It is getting very alarming, all this agreeing with people with whom I have previously had vituperative disagreements.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:04 AM

Buggerbuggerbugger! That should have been:-

"all driven by political dogma and controlled by big-business paymasters, all toeing whatever party-line is in vogue at the time.

Note to self: Must type posts out in Word, proof-read properly, then cut and past into 'Reply to Thread' box! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:07 AM

"It is getting very alarming, all this agreeing with people with whom I have previously had vituperative disagreements"

I get over "stuff" very quickly, Richard, angry as hell one minute, cool calm and fine 'n' dandy the next, and I try very hard not to hold grudges. If someone I've previously disagreed with says something I see as having value, I'm big enough, old enough and ugly enough to support them! :-) :-)

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Musket
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:11 AM

You can get tablets for vituperative you know.

Or is it a suppository?

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:14 AM

Ian, in my time, and thanks to the chronic gout from which I used to suffer, I've had more suppositories up me than you can shake a stick at!

The idea of a suppository doesn't even bring on the involuntary clenching reflex any more!   :-) :-)

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:22 AM

DRIFT ALERT ~~

Odd expression that, eh? I mean, why should anyone want to shake a stick at a pile of suppositories ~~ or at anything else, for that matter; except an orchestra if he was the conductor?...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:24 AM

Nigel - Like all the other people contributing to this thread I don't have any access to the actual information about NHS costs, so anything I state is purely speculation based on my past observations.
I am well aware that on a Friday or Saturday night, an A&E department will be treating a higher number of patients there as the result of drink related injuries, but I still maintain that the numbers from the BBC are likely to be based on flawed or skewed data.
Hospital running costs are not based on the totally unpredictable number of attendees in Accident & Emergency and staffing levels are not based on the statistically expected number of drunks (I think you will find that weekend night-time staffing levels are usually lower than during office hours).
Whatever the number of drunks, there will be heart attacks, house fires, traffic pile-ups, accidental poisonings, kids falling off climbing frames and any number of other reasons for A&E to be needed, hence the ongoing Fixed Costs.

I suppose what I'm saying is don't just read the "tabloid" headlines. The reality is nearly always something entirely different.
Quack!
Geoff.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 05:27 AM

I was prescribed suppositories once. The doctor said to place them in my back passage. I did, but I think the cat must have eaten them.
For all the good they did I might just as well have stuffed them up my arse!

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 06:06 AM

I love a traditional joke.

Subject: RE: BS: NHS treating drunks
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 12 Jan 12 - 06:38 AM

I know of several people with "so called drink problems" that got a free mobility car because they are receiving the higher rate D.L.A. for alcohol problems. So not only do they pay them to drink,they put the on the road as well.

Enjoying the sunshine in Spain since the 3rd of January, not back until february. I bought this place eight years ago for 120,000, the ass has fallen out of the property market here, just told the current value is 52,000.

Regards to all.

Keith