thanks Bristol, so she just signs up at local health center and away to go ? even tho she took USA citizenship ?
thats such good news for her

For non-emergency treatment, it's based largely on habitual residence, not nationality. If you're bringing her back just for the purpose of obtaining treatment, you may find you have to pay for it.

Yes, providing, as Giantaxe says, she's taking up residency again.

In the other threads on this, the subject has often not even been raised when people have registered.

Actually, it's all hospitals that have an emergency room (not all do) and who participate in Medicare (nearly all do). And their legal requirement is limited to "stabilizing" you.

You usually have a GP Surgery within walking distance in any UK town.

Stabilizing.... now that is limited care.

Actually legal minimum is 28 days including public holidays. That's 5 weeks 3 days.

That's usually the part where the yanks jaws drop and they feint.

Hee hee I've got 50 days this year, 25 days hols plus 10 extra I bought, plus 9bank hols (including extra for royal wedding - there's an extra for Queen's Diamond Jubilee next year too) and Xmas and Easter closure days (6). (I work at a university).

I really think DH would find it a struggle if he went back to the States after getting used to the leave here.

I mentioned this to my Mother in law and she told me you can't really factor in the holidays when looking at the pros and cons of each country. I'm like yes I can to me having 5wks of vacation just given to me is a blessing.

I think having a better work/life balance is very much an important factor. I only work 35 hours/week or just over, DH does nights and does 49 hours every other week or just over. I definitely wouldn't fancy putting in all the hours God sends.

Exactly! Having those holidays means you can visit the USA more. I haven't been back to the UK for a while due to vacation time not having earned enough here.

No it's not a competition -it's a debate between two different worldviews.

Your statement just isn't true for the people who are most in need. Again, the things you say always apply to the more well-to-do. Yes if you have a car, live near a town, and are going to see the doctor for a minor ailment, it's easy enough to get there.

But if you are very sick, or poor (many millions of people in the US have to travel by bus), or live in a remote area, it's simply not that easy and many many people go without care as a result. The home visits have been a Godsend to my family members - not because they don't have cars (they do) but because they have not been well enough to leave the house at various times without it making them feel worse. Where I live they'd have to suck it up and go to the doctor's office.

"Feint"

Clever.

And then just wait until you get the bills!

The argument that 'the care is simply better' in the US is not borne out by the facts. I know here in the US we don't always let facts get in the way of a good cheer for ourselves, but in this case I think they matter.