Tough decisions that need to be made??

In an ideal rose tinted glasses kinda world everyone who needs medical treatment should get the best possible care for as long as they need it but are morals writing checks that cannot be met...

treatment of terminal people costs a fortune...

allowing known disabled babies to be born or allowed to continue to live cost a fortune to keep for life...

there are many other moral dilemmas, how long before these answers become critical or have they already...

morals can be very expensive...

are there any alternatives though...

the unemployed need to be fed and housed, can we afford to do it indefinitely...

What political party if any are capable of making the truly tough decisions, which ever did would be committing political suicide, so how will the decisions get made...

The reality i think HF is that the costs of many of these things is totally artificial and profiteering

on a less drastic  level...did you know its cheaper to buy a GOLF buggy than a disable buggy???

did you know that a simple picnic table with a cut out to allo for a wheel chair is £700 whilst the SAME table without the cut out is only £300

translate that into medical equipment (which is no more complex than most industrial equipment)  then you see WHY the costs are so high...

the problem isnt so much the moral cost of helping those who can be helped (note the "can") as the profits to be made from doing so...

as to the unempolyed yes we CAN afford to protect them....we just need to stop the 1% from snatching 90% of the nations wealth

Admin wrote:The reality i think HF is that the costs of many of these things is totally artificial and profiteering

on a less drastic  level...did you know its cheaper to buy a GOLF buggy than a disable buggy???

did you know that a simple picnic table with a cut out to allo for a wheel chair is £700 whilst the SAME table without the cut out is only £300

translate that into medical equipment (which is no more complex than most industrial equipment)  then you see WHY the costs are so high...

the problem isnt so much the moral cost of helping those who can be helped (note the "can") as the profits to be made from doing so...

as to the unempolyed yes we CAN afford to protect them....we just need to stop the 1% from snatching 90% of the nations wealth

the pharma companies have a lot to answer for, the cost of the necessary drugs or treatments are just ridiculous and yes it seems purpose built medical aids are always sky high, perhaps the Govt's need to step in and protect people from the profiteering that goes on...

In the book dead doctors don't lie , the author claims that if they diagnose a patient in america with diabetes that doctor knows he will make around $250,000 off that patient in the next 20 years or so, that is terrifying...

In Britain doctor whoever recommends they go see mr whoever about an operation , money changes hands, the country get billed for what the doctors do, it is open to such corruption...

but as I said who will stand up and stop it, the big companies have such power...

The pharma companies always get a bashing but where would any of us be without them? There would be no new drugs, no progress in treatment, and no help for chronic conditions.

It costs an absolute fortune to develop a new drug, and the companies have to get a return on the money they've put up front. They know that in time, the patent will be lifted and then competitors will enter the market, so they make will less money eventually. An awful lot of drugs fail testing, sometimes at quite a late date, and never get to market, and yet they've cost a lot of money.

Of course they make a profit - they're businesses like any other business, but they also try to make life better for people.

Raggamuffin wrote:The pharma companies always get a bashing but where would any of us be without them? There would be no new drugs, no progress in treatment, and no help for chronic conditions.

It costs an absolute fortune to develop a new drug, and the companies have to get a return on the money they've put up front. They know that in time, the patent will be lifted and then competitors will enter the market, so they make will less money eventually. An awful lot of drugs fail testing, sometimes at quite a late date, and never get to market, and yet they've cost a lot of money.

Of course they make a profit - they're businesses like any other business, but they also try to make life better for people.

They make a huge fortune, no one hardly seems to cure anything they tend to just offer relief, either 4 hours or 6 hours, they know that keeps a customer, probably for life..
billions spent on cold remedies the lies go on...

it wasn't intended as just having a go at pharma companies though the thread was meant to be about who in power will ultimately have the balls to stand up and make the really tough decisions, perhaps this is why we need proportional representation in the govt. then jointly the right decisions can be made without one group or another committing political suicide by making the wrong decisions...

decisions like getting people in to gainful employment not a lifetime of sponging on the dole, getting nurses interested in working by paying them properly, halving the amount the politicians get paid..

heavenlyfather wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The pharma companies always get a bashing but where would any of us be without them? There would be no new drugs, no progress in treatment, and no help for chronic conditions.

It costs an absolute fortune to develop a new drug, and the companies have to get a return on the money they've put up front. They know that in time, the patent will be lifted and then competitors will enter the market, so they make will less money eventually. An awful lot of drugs fail testing, sometimes at quite a late date, and never get to market, and yet they've cost a lot of money.

Of course they make a profit - they're businesses like any other business, but they also try to make life better for people.

They make a huge fortune, no one hardly seems to cure anything they tend to just offer relief, either 4 hours or 6 hours, they know that keeps a customer, probably for life..
billions spent on cold remedies the lies go on...

it wasn't intended as just having a go at pharma companies though the thread was meant to be about who in power will ultimately have the balls to stand up and make the really tough decisions, perhaps this is why we need proportional representation in the govt. then jointly the right decisions can be made without one group or another committing political suicide by making the wrong decisions...

decisions like getting people in to gainful employment not a lifetime of sponging on the dole, getting nurses interested in working by paying them properly, halving the amount the politicians get paid..

I'm not really talking about cold remedies HF. People are free to not buy those if they don't think they help. I'm talking about live-saving drugs, drugs which help give people some quality of life - the big players, not some drug you can buy over the counter. None of them have claimed they can cure a cold, and people should know that.

Isn't the Government trying to make some tough decisions about benefits? As soon as they do that, they get howled down and accused of being monsters. As soon as they say anything about immigration, they're accused of "racism" by the leftie luvvies.

Admin wrote:The reality i think HF is that the costs of many of these things is totally artificial and profiteering

on a less drastic  level...did you know its cheaper to buy a GOLF buggy than a disable buggy???

did you know that a simple picnic table with a cut out to allo for a wheel chair is £700 whilst the SAME table without the cut out is only £300

translate that into medical equipment (which is no more complex than most industrial equipment)  then you see WHY the costs are so high...

the problem isnt so much the moral cost of helping those who can be helped (note the "can") as the profits to be made from doing so...

as to the unempolyed yes we CAN afford to protect them....we just need to stop the 1% from snatching 90% of the nations wealth

It is true things for the disabled are double the price , there is a couple at our church who had a baby they needed a pushchair that fixes onto the front of the mum's wheelchair and that was £700 without any rain cover , they couldn't afford that so they got a harness which holds baby to mum , he is now 16 months old and walks a lot of the time but when he tires he sits on mum's lap , but she has Cerebral Palsy and is very weak ,but its the only way they can get around apart from the car .

My parents paid £4000 for a walk in bath as my dad has Parkinson's and mum is disabled can only walk a short distance and doesn't stand up straight , everything is so expensive when it needn't be in my opinion .

What's wrong with using a shower? Cubicle ones are best - not the sort which go over a bath.

In the case of the lady with CP, didn't she think about that sort of thing before she had the baby?

Raggamuffin wrote:What's wrong with using a shower? Cubicle ones are best - not the sort which go over a bath.

In the case of the lady with CP, didn't she think about that sort of thing before she had the baby?

The bathroom is very small in my parents home they had someone come in and estimate it and it was going to be £12.000 with a new floor and ceiling , my dad gets very anxious with any change and he can't cope with it .

The lady that had the baby was never supposed to have a baby she was told when she was a teenager that she would never have any children , this baby was a complete surprise , she is also type 1 diabetic and cannot walk at all so when she went for her check up at the doctors she thought she was carrying a lot of water as that often happens and it was confirmed that she was 8 months pregnant and 3 weeks later she had a C-section , it was totally unexpected .

I'm not sure where this is leading. Are people saying that these things should cost less or should be paid for by the Government?

Just to add , we wanted to help pay for the bathroom to be made into a wet room and have my parents stay here while all the work was done but they wouldn't allow us to . It took us a year to persuade them to have a stair lift and now they love it , dad comes down in it and mum goes up in it

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm not sure where this is leading. Are people saying that these things should cost less or should be paid for by the Government?

I'm not saying the government should pay for these things at all , i just think as usual they're very over priced because they're a speciality ,I do think that wheel chairs should be paid for by the NHS because wheelchairs are part of health care to help disabled get around and also to help the carer .

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:What's wrong with using a shower? Cubicle ones are best - not the sort which go over a bath.

In the case of the lady with CP, didn't she think about that sort of thing before she had the baby?

The bathroom is very small in my parents home they had someone come in and estimate it and it was going to be £12.000 with a new floor and ceiling , my dad gets very anxious with any change and he can't cope with it .

The lady that had the baby was never supposed to have a baby she was told when she was a teenager that she would never have any children , this baby was a complete surprise , she is also type 1 diabetic and cannot walk at all so when she went for her check up at the doctors she thought she was carrying  a lot of water as that often happens and it was confirmed that she was 8 months pregnant and 3 weeks later she had a C-section , it was totally unexpected .

I don't mean to be offensive, but wouldn't it have been easy enough to use contraception anyway? One never knows what might happen.

Disabled people get benefits to help with extra costs though.

What they should do is decide who actually needs extra money and who doesn't. I know people who are on DLA or whatever it's called now, but they don't need extra money.

heavenlyfather wrote:In an ideal rose tinted glasses kinda world everyone who needs medical treatment should get the best possible care for as long as they need it but are morals writing checks that cannot be met...

treatment of terminal people costs a fortune...

allowing known disabled babies to be born or allowed to continue to live cost a fortune to keep for life...

there are many other moral dilemmas, how long before these answers become critical or have they already...

morals can be very expensive...

are there any alternatives though...

the unemployed need to be fed and housed, can we afford to do it indefinitely...

What political party if any are capable of making the truly tough decisions, which ever did would be committing political suicide, so how will the decisions get made...

I'm a bit confused about this post. Are you suggesting that euthanasia is a good option for people who are terminally ill, disabled, or for babies who are badly disabled?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

The bathroom is very small in my parents home they had someone come in and estimate it and it was going to be £12.000 with a new floor and ceiling , my dad gets very anxious with any change and he can't cope with it .

The lady that had the baby was never supposed to have a baby she was told when she was a teenager that she would never have any children , this baby was a complete surprise , she is also type 1 diabetic and cannot walk at all so when she went for her check up at the doctors she thought she was carrying  a lot of water as that often happens and it was confirmed that she was 8 months pregnant and 3 weeks later she had a C-section , it was totally unexpected .

I don't mean to be offensive, but wouldn't it have been easy enough to use contraception anyway? One never knows what might happen.

I don't think they ever believed they would conceive to be honest , if you saw my friend in the wheelchair you would understand what i mean , she cannot walk she has no strength in her limbs and is losing her sight from diabetes as she cannot exercise to help keep blood sugar level, her speech is also affected by SP. I think they're very happy with the little boy to them he is a miracle baby .
They do get benefits to help with the costs, but with the pushchair there isn't any help , they manage really well and rely on her mum to help a lot of the time .

The little boy won't need a pushchair for very long though will he?

I don't know - I think people just have to make do with what they have and cope as best they can. All this special equipment does cost a lot, but is it really necessary?

Raggamuffin wrote:The little boy won't need a pushchair for very long though will he?

I don't know - I think people just have to make do with what they have and cope as best they can. All this special equipment does cost a lot, but is it really necessary?

He was on his mum's lap and now walks most of the time . i do think wheelchairs are necessary people who can't walk do need them .

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The little boy won't need a pushchair for very long though will he?

I don't know - I think people just have to make do with what they have and cope as best they can. All this special equipment does cost a lot, but is it really necessary?

He was on his mum's lap and now walks most of the time . i do think wheelchairs are necessary people who can't walk do need them .

Well yes, if they literally can't walk at all. I'm talking about the pushchair really.

I know I sound unsympathetic, it's just that I hear about this sort of thing all the time, and I get fed up with it. Soz.

and as for the walk in bath , that's definitely needed as my mum is 82 and was helping my dad in and out of the bath , they had a chair that lowered him in and out but even that was difficult for her to do , my brother works full time as does my husband and my dad won't let me help him with his bath its his dignity which i can understand , the government haven't help pay with anything that my parents have had done to their home to help with their disability , they have paid or we and my brothers have paid for it to be done .
They only get their private pension and no other help .

Vicar of Dibley wrote:and as for the walk in bath , that's definitely needed as my mum is 82 and was helping my dad in and out of the bath , they had a chair that lowered him in and out but even that was difficult for her to do , my brother works full time as does my husband and my dad won't let me help him with his bath its his dignity which i can understand , the government haven't help pay with anything that my parents have had done to their home to help with their disability , they have paid or we and my brothers have paid for it to be done .
They only get their private pension and no other help .

Wouldn't a shower be easier though VOD? I assume he can stand up. Baths are quite difficult to get in and out of at the best of times, unless you're a kid.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

He was on his mum's lap and now walks most of the time . i do think wheelchairs are necessary people who can't walk do need them .

Well yes, if they literally can't walk at all. I'm talking about the pushchair really.

I know I sound unsympathetic, it's just that I hear about this sort of thing all the time, and I get fed up with it. Soz.

If you saw my friend you would feel differently she needs the help she really does , she cannot walk or do anything for herself , she even needs help on and off the toilet .

Raggamuffin wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:and as for the walk in bath , that's definitely needed as my mum is 82 and was helping my dad in and out of the bath , they had a chair that lowered him in and out but even that was difficult for her to do , my brother works full time as does my husband and my dad won't let me help him with his bath its his dignity which i can understand , the government haven't help pay with anything that my parents have had done to their home to help with their disability , they have paid or we and my brothers have paid for it to be done .
They only get their private pension and no other help .

Wouldn't a shower be easier though VOD? I assume he can stand up. Baths are quite difficult to get in and out of at the best of times, unless you're a kid.

He has Parkinson's can't walk properly has no balance and has dementia and heart problems , a shower would have been better but the walk in bath is just as good as he can sit down and there is a shower connected to it , he trips on almost anything . He falls over because of the Parkinson's