Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On Good Morning Britain on Friday we're doing a piece on the 'NHS Minor Ailment Scheme' (where, in some parts of the UK, you can get things like liquid ibuprofen, plasters, hay fever remedies, etc for free). This is a scheme that's been around for a while but, through social media, it seems that it's only now that many people are becoming aware of it.

Do you think it's fair that the scheme doesn't apply to everyone in the UK?

And is it fair that those who might not need it are using it? i.e should only those who are on lower incomes or benefits be able to access these medicines? if you are happy to put forward your view on TV pls PM me. Thanks

I think you are mistaken in what this scheme does. You can only get these medicines for free if you don't pay the prescription charge eg children, people on low incomes. So while you say some people in the UK can't benefit, those people can access exactly the same medicines for free via a free GP appointment. All this scheme does is reduce the demand on GPs, and is targeted at areas where GPs are particularly busy. What's unfair about that?


Now if media, social or traditional, wants to get people steamed up about something unfair, how about the parts of the UK (everywhere except England) where everybody gets free prescriptions??

Yes but who gets free prescriptions isn't always fair. I get free prescriptions because of one drug I need to take daily. Because of that one drug, I get everything free. I now can also get free antihistamines for mild hay-fever, paracetamol for when I've had a few vinos too many, plasters for when I get a blister with my new shoes etc etc. But I earn a reasonable salary so is this really good use of government money?


For those who need it, it's a good scheme and should be helpful if it frees up GP time but there needs to be some level of control to try and make it more targeted.

All children are entitled to free prescriptions. I would love to know if and where this service might be available locally. I spent a fraught few weeks recently trying to get a prescription for antihistamine for my child who was going away on a school trip. Not because I wanted it "free" but because the school were unable to give the medicine which we'd normally buy over the counter without one. I struggled with getting a GP appointment (Dulwich Medical Centre) and was mildly upbraided by the GP who muttered "and its no wonder that people complain about not being able to get appointments" (That he appeared to be the only GP working there at the time is by the by). Sometimes you do need to seek medical advice for a child in a situation where you might not for yourself and where, if GP appointments are scarce, it might be more appropriate to see a pharmacist for "minor ailments". As I understand the scheme they will refer you to your GP for anything not "minor".

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...