The dangers of the NHS diverting people away to private services

The principle of only seeing your doctor if you need to, and only going to hospital or dialling 999 in an emergency, is sensible.

As many ambulances often advertise: you wouldn’t call the fire department to blow out a candle, would you?

The idea is that you should try and help yourself before using the NHS; but what about the dangers of diverting patients for self-care or private care? What are we risking here?

A recent campaign encouraging parents of under-fives to take them to the pharmacy for help as opposed to their doctors could be putting youngsters at serious risk.

It’s one thing going to the pharmacist for medicine to treat something that can genuinely be resolved at home, but the risk is that parents may be missing vital signs of more serious ailments.

A pharmacist is not a doctor, and they are not there to provide a diagnosis.

The recent campaign suggested things like coughs and colds, stomach aches and teething pains can all be resolved without the need of a doctor. This diversion could save the NHS millions of pounds by pushing patients toward the private route (which is a hot-topic for debate in itself). But there are deadly diseases that the average parent could mistake for something simple, and the worry is that parents may decide to use the pharmacist and assume what’s wrong when a doctor would be able to spot something more serious.

This could be the difference between life and death…

The thin line between good advice and serious risk

The NHS has a duty to correctly advise us and help us. If a campaign were to divert patients aware from doctors to save money, there must be assurances that people will not be at risk of misunderstanding what the problem is.

The line between good advice that could save money, and simply puttying patients at risk, is a very thin one indeed.