Bill the drunks

Bill the drunks

Bill the drunks

First published in News
Last updated
by

I SEE in The Press of September 2 that York Hospital faces £10 million in fines because not meeting targets.

Well, they won’t help themselves by charging drunks or drug users who are taking up beds for hours then there are no beds for those who really need them. Hence patients are waiting a long time, so the hospital does not meet its targets and is fined.

Two points here: the hospital should charge drinkers and drug users for their time in hospital to offset the fines; or have a separate unit not in A&E so that patients can be seen more quickly, helping the hospital to meet its target. The unit that treats drunks and drug users could be exempt from any such timings or fines.

Wojciech Simpson, Chestnut Grove, New Earswick.

Comments (4)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:56am Thu 4 Sep 14

Marc77 says...

i can see the idea, but if this was to be carried out, who will be targeted next?.
i can see the idea, but if this was to be carried out, who will be targeted next?. Marc77
  • Score: 4

1:01pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Fanny Free House says...

Charging drunks will not resolve the problem, and equally would not raise sufficient funds to cover fines of £10 million.

We need to change the way we measure the performance, and that should include removing drink and drug related attendances as not A&E statistics. They are definitely not accidents and frequently not emergencies.

Attention seeking drunks should be a low priority and only attended after genuine A&E patients, unless there is immediate threat to life.
Charging drunks will not resolve the problem, and equally would not raise sufficient funds to cover fines of £10 million. We need to change the way we measure the performance, and that should include removing drink and drug related attendances as not A&E statistics. They are definitely not accidents and frequently not emergencies. Attention seeking drunks should be a low priority and only attended after genuine A&E patients, unless there is immediate threat to life. Fanny Free House
  • Score: -13

1:22pm Thu 4 Sep 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

I couldn't disagree more with the author of this letter.
Charge NO-ONE for their treatment. Especially not on the basis of one person's arbitrary moral code.
I couldn't disagree more with the author of this letter. Charge NO-ONE for their treatment. Especially not on the basis of one person's arbitrary moral code. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: -2

2:00pm Thu 4 Sep 14

SpinningJenny says...

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
I couldn't disagree more with the author of this letter.
Charge NO-ONE for their treatment. Especially not on the basis of one person's arbitrary moral code.
Just what I was about to say. We already went over this argument goodness knows how many times last month.
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: I couldn't disagree more with the author of this letter. Charge NO-ONE for their treatment. Especially not on the basis of one person's arbitrary moral code.[/p][/quote]Just what I was about to say. We already went over this argument goodness knows how many times last month. SpinningJenny
  • Score: 7

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree