Should There Be Charges For Certain Appointments And Treatments On The NHS?

Introduction

Treatments and appointments of patients should be done in a very caring manner so that proper maintenance of their health is procured. Different treatments have different policies and techniques and however, some treatments should be done based on the situation of the patients. This present essay shows the effect of treatment and their consequences on the health of patients. As it is considered that treatment is a basic need of an individual and therefore, for appointment there should be no demand for money. It is the responsibility of the doctors, nurses and other physicians to maintain proper health of the patient.

In this current essay it highlights the arguments that are against the provision of demand of money regarding appointment and for the motion of the topic. This study focuses on the main part of the essay that is the arguments and counter arguments regarding the treatment of patients and some fruitful recommendations for improving the strategies of treatment. Finally a conclusion has been drawn based on the relevant data analysed from the study.

Changes focus on the demand of money during appointment and treatment

The main point of focus in this study throws light on the development and improvement of the situation of demanding money for casual reasons in health care sectors. Abou-Foul et al. (2016) argues that it is necessary to pay for the appointments as it is the basic income of the doctors. However, in this context Bharadwaj and Rice (2016) counter argues that health and social care organisations are considered to be helping hand for people those who are in need of the medical services. Delgadillo et al. (2015) have shed light on the bias towards highest payment not on the generic treatment or diseases. Stiles et al. (2015) contradicts stating that not all the sectors in the NHS are free of cost. The authors have pointed out that in case of dental care as well as for the non-UK people the NHS charges for appointments. On contrary Maughan et al. (2016) have fetched the attention towards infectious disease such as STD services which are also free of charge for the immigrants as well. Similarly, the next paragraph focuses on the fees structure of the NHS in order to improve their situation (Spectator.co.uk 2013).

The basic significant way of treatment should be free of cost as it is in the case of government hospitals and those who are in need of proper treatment in free of cost. The people who belong to the category of BPL (below poverty line) must be enhanced with good quality treatment in low cost.  In addition to this Bharadwaj and Rice (2016) stated that it is the duty of NHS to treat people based on their situation and economic condition. The ultimate purpose of treatment is to focus on the health of the people and make them cure and out of danger (Nhs.uk 2015). Moreover, in this context Abou-Foul et al. (2016) opined that this statement is not properly justified as in order to get better facilities and good treatment, it is necessary to invest good amount of money. Furthermore, the chairman of NHS argued that they are demanding the appointment fees only for the betterment of the facilities as their staffs are not up to the mark (Nhs.uk 2015). The staffs are poor in their service providence and therefore, they need funds for the improvement of the situation. Delgadillo et al. (2015) have furthermore added that financial crisis in the Healthcare sector is also a reason for the charges in the appointment. The declining economic conditions with the notion of Brexit may also pose impudent threat on the services. Although this can be cited as valid point, the counterargument has made this a weak point in comparison. However, Abou-Foul et al. (2016) contradicted that this is not a proper decision by the chairman as it the organisation that serves patients for their benefits not for their investment of money which can be cited as feeble counterargument with this respect. The next paragraph discusses on relation of the income of the individual practitioners of NHS.

The individual practitioners focus on their income rates and calculate their profit at the end of the day. However, this is not the accepted work of the practitioners to only demand for huge amount of money and fills their pocket. In this context, Bharadwaj and Rice (2016) argues that there should be legal provisions and punishments for those practitioners who only claims for money and do not pay any attention towards the requirements of the patients. On the contrary Abou-Foul et al. (2016) opined that it is the profession of the practitioners to increase their income and number of patients at the end of the day and therefore, it is not a crime. For example, in the case of New Zealand, it has been observed that there was high charge for the rich people and minimum charge for the exempted those who are in real need of treatment in low cost. However, it has become a part of business for the doctors to treat people as a fool and claim money unnecessarily. In this case, the structure needs revision (Kingsfund.org.uk 2016).

Conclusion

From the above discussion, it has been found that this present essay is highlighting the changes that should be made in the provision of appointments and treatments in NHS.  The essay has produced arguments highlighting three principles. First paragraph presents arguments on the charging of the appointments that make bias towards non-UK people and dental care. The second paragraph highlights training in NHS and third on the individual income. Therefore, it can be concluded that after gathering knowledge from the above discussion it is the right way to treat people with a minimum amount of money which is only required for the treatment and rest of the effort should be enforced in the good treatment of the patient.

It can be recommended that, in order to resist the system of demanding money for the treatment and before the treatment it is necessary to train the practitioners in their medical colleges. They should be made understand that their focus should always be on the treatment of the patients and how much they are enforcing their practice on them. The main aim of the doctors should be to treat people without taking money.