Why does the British government not give soldiers medals for wounds and death suffered in battle?

The Americans give their wounded soldiers the purple heart for wounds in combat. And in combat most injuries are not flesh wounds. To give a medal to a soldier whos suffered injuries in a warzone a medal would not cost a lot of money. And for the soldiers who've died in service at least their families would have a badge of their bravery to keep in their memory. But as before the pride it would give either the soldier or their family would be way above the price it would be to make the things. so why dont they?

Why does the British government not give soldiers medals for wounds and death suffered in battle?
The British system is based upon campaign medals with bars attached naming the location of the campaign.





The family get the medals due to the soldier if killed in action.





The British army stopped using specific wound badges after WW1 I believe.





With regards medals they are very expensive as they don't just make 100 at a time the production run is calculated in the thousands, the cost being borne by the British Tax-payer.





The Labour Party have shown more willingness to crop the British Forces down in size to save more money, thereby leaving the security of the UK at risk.


Recently 3 Regiments were reduced to one called the Mercian Regiment.





Another nail in the coffin of the British Regimental System.
Reply:Probably due to the fact that the British Military thinks that if you get wounded in battle, "You're just doing your duty old chap!" The British Military has never given medals to their soldiers, Marines or sailors for wounds suffered in the line of duty. This is their job, nothing more. Although they did give medals and honours to loud-mouth, whiny, back stabbing Field Marshals that NEVER could meet their objectives on time. (See Field Marshal Sir Bernard Law Montgomery).
Reply:i guess they just don't see any honor in taking a hit..