Who pays for what

[rafhelp]

When teenagers, uni students, young adults go out partying late nights, get drunk then either injure themselves, overdose themselves, have fights then end up in hospital A&E and get treated, who is actually paying for this treatment?

[Defblade]

Those who pay tax. Or possibly those we borrow £5,000,000,000,000,000 a minute from.

There is of course duty on alcohol, so a fair chance the drunkards have contributed a bit (although where their money came from in the first place.....).

In theory, those youngsters grow up, calm down, get jobs and start funding the next lot of yoofs

[LeftArm]

Of course technically it's the tax payer who provides the cash for the NHS.
The problem is if you want to stop paying for these where do you draw the line?
I might have a couple of pints and then accidentally trip over a step, should I not be treated because I've had a couple of pints?
What if someone punches me while I'm drunk?
Another issue is that if you withdraw treatment when the injured person could be considered to have done something that contributed to their condition, should you include dangerous/injurous sports? Rugby, mountainbiking, football even.
And if that is the case what about driving a car?
Crossing the road?

[rafhelp]

no because alcohol abuse, or alcohol influence has caused alot more problems then say driving a car (without being drunk) or climbing mount everest. How many young lads do you know that climb mount everest.

I have worked hard last few years and paid alot of tax, that money is money that ive worked for hours on end. That money is helping to support those less fortunate then myself for example, the homeless, those without jobs on the dole etc.

So if i was on the dole i am in effect paying myself, because that money has been taken off me as taxes, when i was working. I suppose its not as black and white as that, but that is the case more or less.

[johnep]

There used to be a classification of the poor into deserving and undeserving. These days most are in the latter.
johnep

[LeftArm]

no because alcohol abuse, or alcohol influence has caused alot more problems then say driving a car (without being drunk) or climbing mount everest.

I don't have comparative statistics for this but even if it is the case driving also causes a significant strain on the NHS and other services.

How many young lads do you know that climb mount everest.

None, but I know of several who have been involved in car accidents.

[hibernia]

It could be said that the intoxicated visitors to A+E provide useful practice for the medics. If it wasn't for the experience gained on them doctors might never do enough stitching etc to get competent to treat those of us who can injure ourselves without the help of alcohol.

[crit care]

Sadly i dont think you can draw a line and refuse to treat people based on why they have come into a&e, unless there is some justification ie they are being abusive and uncooperative. Although i saw a guy today who had taken a mixed ovetdose, threatening to jump out the window, shouting at staff, running up and down the ward, jumping on the bed, so they called security to hold him down and got the anaesthetist to tube him! I would have let him jump out the window! But again the drs had a duty to care for this patient, who is now in a bed costing £1500 per day not including drugs, consumables and nursing time.....and were all helping to pay for it!