saigenaiden
 |
Absolutely. These people at one point made the CHOICE to do the things they are doing. For every choice there is a consequence. Besides, most of these people do not sustain jobs, so who pays for their healthcare...TAXPAYERS.
Note: I was referring to drug users in my last statement.
Duh.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
bodmodangel
|
Yup! I can't believe people that smoke all their lives get lung transplants! nor alcoholics get a liver transplant.
They shouldn't be able to.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
mr bigs
|
I think priority should be given to those who havent made themselves ill through knowingly unhealthy living.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
NutstersChick
|
it's called taking life-style responsibility.
if they don't look after themselves why should the NHS pick up the tab?
i'm probably alone in thinking.
the clinically obese, smokers, drinkers, drug-addicts etc should take note.
give up smoking, lose the weight, stop drinking ( alcohol is a drug ) stop their drug abuse or stand the chance of losing health-care.
from a personal point of view i've seen a family member, have a fortune in NHS funding spent on them,
taking part in a magic pill trial to cut their horrendous & dangerous weight problem, only to hit their ideal weight then within a year pile it all plus extra, on again!
how can you help people if they won't/don't help themselves?
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
willowbee3
 |
I don't have insurance and I think that if your health condition is your own fault, you should be responsible for at least some of the payment.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Jeff M
|
Insurance is the sharing of risk. If you get insurance they ask questions. By your answers to these questions they determine the amount you should pay by the risk group you are in. It's a numbers game. The insurance company knows the risks and issue you an insurance policy. While we're talking about money, maybe there could be a government agency to stop the sale of things that cause health problems...... People may be responsible for their own health problems but smokers and drug users aren't the only ones. There are many people who have health problems from the things they eat too. Heart disease isn't only for the smokers. If it weren't profitable for somebody, we wouldn't be allowed to do it.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Scarlett
|
As a smoker I don't think we should, but, I do think we should have to wait longer for treatments to put right the effects of smoking, alcohol and drugs. There are people out there in the wide world who have never smoked, drank alcohol or taken drugs, so they should get priority over those of us who have and do.
I, as a smoker, also agree with the smoking ban in pubs and restaurants as I don't want my meal covered in cigarette smoke.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Summerboy
|
I agree with JOHN V, contrary to what SAIGENAIDEN says i have worked for 43 years, never had a penny off the government, but paid in all the time, i smoke, the amount of money i have paid in should entitle me to treatment, this idea is blatant discrimination, the NHS trust are using this to save money so they can spend more on office furniture instead of paying nurses more money. I watched "TONIGHT" yesterday, did you notice that a surgeon would accept £11000 in his back pocket but wouldn't operate on NHS, i think that says it all "MONEY"
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
chicababe231
 |
So, people who drink or smoke or take drugs should have to pay for treatment. What about the people who drive cars? If they have an accident that was their fault, they should pay for their treatment? The people who have hereditary diseases should pay for their treatment because they knew they were at risk of that disease or condition? People who have dangerous jobs should be made to pay for their treatment because they were aware of the risks when they started that particular job? This is the most ridiculous idea I have ever heard. The whole point of paying into the health system is that we are entitled to treatment. The immigrant who hasn't worked a single day since arriving in the UK gets treatment and those of us who have worked all our lives and have paid our money into the NHS are left standing at the back of the queue..... No wonder this country is such a mess!!!
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
snowdrop21uk
 |
This would be almost impossible to enforce as i am sure that most people do something that could negatively affect their health. From people who sunbathe or sunbed too much to overweight or lazy people. There are even people who over excercise or diet too much. You could never draw a line that would be fair.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Mazanb
 |
Absolutely not. This latest scam by NHS providers is only to save money and shorten the appearance of waiting lists. Take a look the next time you are in a hospital, the amount of obese nurses is obscene. I certainly would not follow any advice, be it to give up smoking, lose weight if it came from someone with obvious problems. When I trained as a nurse, statistics showed that Doctors and Nurses were the heaviest drinkers and smokers compared to other professions. If you need an operation/treatment as a Doc or nurse there is no problem getting in ahead of any waiting list, in my experience. What does that say?
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Ragman
|
My god....where would you draw the line....charge women who want caesarian sections instead of natural births....or just charge them because it was their choice to have a child in the first place.
What about smokers that work in the NHS..would they get a discount????
Would you charge people that get run over because they should have been more careful.
What a ridiculous proposition.
And yes...i'm a smoker ...who works for the NHS
This raises the question also as to whether addictions are illnesses in themselves and is the person who smokes or on drugs always to blame for their addiction?
In addition...having worked for the last 20 years and paying national insurance contributions, am I more entitled than someone who is workshy and never contributed. (Please note I am not having a go at anyone who is out of work but is actively looking...you have my sympathy).
But how can you categorise people in this manner as there would always be other arguements.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
JANICE N
 |
this is a question that really gets me going
firstly when someone has worked since they left school at maybe 15 or 16 never been out of work since that in later life 50 ish find they are in need of life saving surgery having paid national insurance all there life never claimed sickness benifit why shouldnt they have the treatment regardless of smoking drinking or being over weight
having had life saving surgery one year ago i was surprised and anoyed that joining me in the queue for the consultant were people who
1. couldnt speak any english
2. went to the front of the queue
its about time this country got real and looked after those that have PAID all there working life and not just come here as a relative for FREE treatment
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
raggy1852
|
put it this way if you had a drink one night and crashed your car should you be treated before some one who didn't drink and crashed their car
NO so people who make a big thing out of this are no more in-titled than any one who smokes /drinks what ever
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
john v
|
I have all the vices and if i was ill through smoking or anything similar like Eating red meat all my life and consuming vast amounts of caffiene and sugar (The list goes on) I would expect and demand treatment owing to the fact that I have worked for over forty years and served in the armed forces and have paid into the nhs through my stamps and tax and therefore am surely entitled to get something back should i need it
To sum up Most of us have allready paid for our treatment
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
James W
|
It is everyone's responsibility to pay for their own health care. Gov't funding for health care only destroy individual responsibility and the family support structure. Its makes people dependent on the government and the party that supports more and more subsidies, thus making these people unable to have real freedom of choice in politics and in their lives. A prime example of all this is the destruction of the black family since the "great" society of the sixties. Gov't steps in and all personal and family responsibility breaksdown.
This sickens me.
Add to it the fact that the rise in health care has occured becouse the free market factor is taken out off it. People dont see their health as relating to the finances. Its easy to see that if people paid for the own healthcare they would protect the finances by taking care of their health. People also go see the doctor for every little thing, often when they dont need to, something else that would be cut out if they paid for it theirselves. Add to that the fact the unwarranted lawsuites cause doctors to be over protective and send their patients to numerous specialist and test just to make sure they arent missing something that they could get sued for.
All of this speaks to an eternal truth.
Socialism fails everytime it is tried.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Felidae
|
Hmmm - where would you draw the line? What happens if you get an injury from sport?
Don't forget that smoking is legal, as if alcohol, caffeine, etc.
I do have some sympathy with this argument however; but these should be clinically based decisions; Eg;Is it safe to undertake this treatment if you BMI is over 35 for example. What is the cost effectiveness (Rationing has always existed BTW) of this treatment if the person is going to carry on smoking? Etc.
So in short, no they shouldn't pay; but they also shouldn't expect complete access to treatment.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Kookie M
 |
No
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Angry Birdy
|
And motorists should pay for injuries from road accidents, horse riders should pay if they need treatment after falling from their horses, pregnant women should pay for their obstetrics, children should have to use their pocket money for hospital care if they fall off their bike and break their arms, old people should pay for treatment they might need for arthritis. The list is endless..............and yes I am being silly. If smokers (who contribute millions to the economy in tax) have to pay for treatment, so should everyone else. It's unfair to be selective, because just about every human activity can cause harm to someone.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
D B
|
What about those with a type A personality (short tempered; run on adrenaline etc) who are more likely to have heart disease
or those with a type C personality (passive, worriers) who are more likely to get cancer. Should we refuse to treat those as well.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
stitched up
|
So long as the government, the advertisers and the manufacturers chip in out of the millions they made getting people that way.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
xxangel1246xx
|
No. Just because they suffer from an addiction, does not mean they should be punished for it.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Pat R
|
Should people who go skiing have to pay if they hurt themselves,or fell walkers who get lost and suffer hypothermia,what about people who sleep about and get HIV,sexually transmitted diseases or cervical cancer.
I could go on and on,theres lots of illnesses that are caused by the people who get them.
A lot of people who smoke these days are older people and they have paid millions into the coffers for the NHS
Also,what about all the new immigrants who are getting free treatment over here,they have never paid a penny in,where do you start.
So my answer to your question is an emphatic NO.
Was this answer helpful to you? Yes
/ No
|
|
Large Text