I wont be able to get a diagnosis because...

Page 2 of 2 [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Liopleurodon
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 214
Location: The Tethys Sea

24 Sep 2008, 7:00 am

Wow. All of this makes me realise how lucky I am. I went to my GP who didn't seem convinced but agreed to refer me on to the mental health team. I saw a psychiatric nurse who then referred me on to a psychologist who was qualified to diagnose ASDs in adults, and he diagnosed me. All of this took a couple of months. I'm also in London. Which bit of London are you in?


_________________
Do I look like a freaking people person?


HarryWilliams
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2008
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 226

24 Sep 2008, 7:06 am

Try talking to Paul Wady [email protected] He's an autistic man working for the NAS in London and will be able to point you in the right direction.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

24 Sep 2008, 7:10 am

There are probably more services in London than other places. I got diagnosed in London. It doesn't necessarily work how you think. When there is nothing viable in your immediate area it is called 'tertiary care'. Tertiary care is a bit of an pain, and often the person from the health trust knows nothing about what they are referring as mine admitted. So it is possible albeit bureaucratic.



ghouna
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jul 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 254
Location: London UK

24 Sep 2008, 7:18 am

Liopleurodon, i live in peckham (old kent road)

harry williams> thank you, i will contact that man


_________________
(¯`v´¯)
`·.¸.·´
¸.·´¸.·´¨) ¸.·*¨)
(¸.·´ (¸.·´ .·´ ¸¸.·¨¯`·.`.~*

Being me is great!


Liopleurodon
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 214
Location: The Tethys Sea

24 Sep 2008, 7:29 am

The guy who diagnosed me was in Woolwich, which isn't far from you at all, but it was through the local NHS mental health services, and you're in a different borough, so I'm not sure how it works. There has to be someone who can do it though.


_________________
Do I look like a freaking people person?


0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

24 Sep 2008, 7:40 am

ghouna wrote:
Liopleurodon, i live in peckham (old kent road)

harry williams> thank you, i will contact that man

You aren't far from the maudsley hospital, though be forewarned their waiting list can be up to a year.



demeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 615

24 Sep 2008, 8:51 am

From what I have seen on this board and elsewhere in the USA and Canada, the cost of a private psychologist will go about $2000 - $3000US and about $2000 - $4000Cnd. With that in mind, I would guess that a private dx in London would be about 1000 - 3000 Pounds Sterling in the UK.

I will not start a debate on public health care here but I am sure Michael Moore did not mention this in Sicko.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

24 Sep 2008, 9:04 am

demeus wrote:
From what I have seen on this board and elsewhere in the USA and Canada, the cost of a private psychologist will go about $2000 - $3000US and about $2000 - $4000Cnd. With that in mind, I would guess that a private dx in London would be about 1000 - 3000 Pounds Sterling in the UK.

I will not start a debate on public health care here but I am sure Michael Moore did not mention this in Sicko.

The NHS option was better, being a research hospital. You can't make generalisations on such a speciality. I wouldn't mention all the other public amenities that you rely on but take for granted just in case you suddenly break out pink spots. You can do a mixture of public and private services without reverting to communism you realise.



donkey
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 May 2006
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,515
Location: ireland

24 Sep 2008, 11:02 am

interesting observation.........the NHS is suffering and we hear, almost daily of how it is falling apart.

there is difficulty gettign a diagnosis, i had to pay privately.

i think the assertion that there is a reluctance to diagnose you as you can then make a claim on diasability is correct, the NHS is really struggling to deliver any service.

i agree you should assert your right to make an appointment to be reffered, these days the NHS is run by accountans who tell doctors to say no.
to always say no.

insist then threaten with a solictors letter.
its crazy talk but otherwise you just get no.


_________________
a great civilisation cannot be conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within- W. Durant


demeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 615

24 Sep 2008, 11:37 am

0_equals_true wrote:
demeus wrote:
From what I have seen on this board and elsewhere in the USA and Canada, the cost of a private psychologist will go about $2000 - $3000US and about $2000 - $4000Cnd. With that in mind, I would guess that a private dx in London would be about 1000 - 3000 Pounds Sterling in the UK.

I will not start a debate on public health care here but I am sure Michael Moore did not mention this in Sicko.

The NHS option was better, being a research hospital. You can't make generalisations on such a speciality. I wouldn't mention all the other public amenities that you rely on but take for granted just in case you suddenly break out pink spots. You can do a mixture of public and private services without reverting to communism you realise.


OK, you have asked for it.

I do not disagree with public health care on the grounds that it is communism or socialism. I disagree with it on the grounds that is really is not the solution to all of the problems in the USA as many lead us to believe. This story as well as many others I see prove it.

Right now, in the USA, we have a system where those who have the money or decent insurance get decent health care and those who do not are left to fend for themselves (beyond stablizing the person). In the UK, people who have money can either use the private system which seems to be run just as well as the national system if not better, or they can use the NHS where they are stabilized in an emergency and then wait for anything else no matter what the urgency.

In other words, neither system is good at providing health care to the masses who cannot pay for it. As a taxpayer, why would I want a system that will give me exactly what I am getting now (or possibly less).

In the case of the OP, he has 2 choices now. Figure out how to come up with 3,000 pounds or fight a system intent on not offering him the services he needs. If the person cannot get said services, then I do not care if it is a research hospital or whatever, it is useless.



MemberSix
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 606

24 Sep 2008, 11:49 am

demeus wrote:
0_equals_true wrote:
demeus wrote:
From what I have seen on this board and elsewhere in the USA and Canada, the cost of a private psychologist will go about $2000 - $3000US and about $2000 - $4000Cnd. With that in mind, I would guess that a private dx in London would be about 1000 - 3000 Pounds Sterling in the UK.

I will not start a debate on public health care here but I am sure Michael Moore did not mention this in Sicko.

The NHS option was better, being a research hospital. You can't make generalisations on such a speciality. I wouldn't mention all the other public amenities that you rely on but take for granted just in case you suddenly break out pink spots. You can do a mixture of public and private services without reverting to communism you realise.


OK, you have asked for it.

I do not disagree with public health care on the grounds that it is communism or socialism. I disagree with it on the grounds that is really is not the solution to all of the problems in the USA as many lead us to believe. This story as well as many others I see prove it.

Right now, in the USA, we have a system where those who have the money or decent insurance get decent health care and those who do not are left to fend for themselves (beyond stablizing the person). In the UK, people who have money can either use the private system which seems to be run just as well as the national system if not better, or they can use the NHS where they are stabilized in an emergency and then wait for anything else no matter what the urgency.

In other words, neither system is good at providing health care to the masses who cannot pay for it. As a taxpayer, why would I want a system that will give me exactly what I am getting now (or possibly less).

In the case of the OP, he has 2 choices now. Figure out how to come up with 3,000 pounds or fight a system intent on not offering him the services he needs. If the person cannot get said services, then I do not care if it is a research hospital or whatever, it is useless.

Your dollars buy you way less healthcare than my british pounds buy me.

Why ?

Because you have dividend-hungry shareholders taking a slice of your health insurance.

In the UK, public (national) health insurance is paid for by all taxpayers - in proportion to their earnings.

In the US, there is no such proportionality - it's the same price to rich and poor alike.

The upshot of a purely private healthcare system, is that poorer people suffer poorer health because the service isn't free at the point of delivery.

I know that if I get a malignant condition, I'm able to get treatment for it - even if I have to wait a couple of months.
It's a far better thing to force contribution to a public health service via taxes than to leave it to the poor to budget for their healthcare - and let them die if they can't afford the same-price premiums as the rich.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

24 Sep 2008, 12:05 pm

You are right that neither is perfect. However there are different ideas of stabilising.

If you have brain tumour and you have no health insurance to cover, your only hope is donations/charity even though removing the tumour would save you life, whereas in the UK you would be fast-tracked.

The US has effectively as sort of national insurance as it provides aid to poorer people, however the question how each of these solutions spread the money round.

Regardless of the health system few places value treating unseen illnesses above physical. Even our government commissioned a report around decade ago by a leading encomiast who showed how not treating these patients would affect the economy. They have only just started pushing measures in place to address this.

One thing that is for certain: Not everything is going to be commercially attractive. I wouldn’t say that the private healthcare in the UK especially good for things like autism. Private is poorly regulated, has been shown to be exploitative in some cases, doesn’t always have the most qualified people, and for me ultimately was not able to help me.

Research is linked to universities and teaching hospitals. They have a combination of private and public funding but your treatment is funded through the NHS.

It doesn’t make commercial sense to do initial research yourself. The major drug companies often don’t do the initial research. They get discoveries from smart people then do the pre-production and production. They have the money to ‘evergreen’ patents. Very little of this money trickles down to those that actually did the original research.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,262
Location: London

24 Sep 2008, 12:10 pm

MemberSix the whole point of health insurance is companies compete on rates. Though there is some health insurance aid I believe, and they effectively have a government health insurance for some people.