NHS - Illegal And Narrow Minded?

By Verite Reily Collins

OK for use in all areas

Britain lags behind when it comes to providing new drugs for cancer treatment. European patients have quicker access to these drugs, but if British patients ask for the same treatment, not only do they have to pay for drugs that are often free to other EU citizens, but the 'dog-in-the-manger' NHS turns round and charges them for their normal treatment, which up until then they would have received for free.

But charities are on the war-path.

A recent study by Dr. Dyfrig Hughes, highlighted by the BBC, says that the NHS relies on charitable donations for the treatment and support of children and teenagers with cancer. "Up to half of funding in NHS specialist cancer centres in England and Wales comes from charities". Some oncologists said without charity support many services would not exist. However, Hughes says, "the charity figures could be an underestimate, as they did not include the many hospital and local charities which also provide funding".


This method of funding raises questions about the government's responsibility for cancer care. It is almost impossible to provide accurate expenditure figures, but in one year alone, estimates are that between £25m - £38m came from national charities, with possibly between £38m and £55m coming from the NHS. "For things which might be labelled as luxury that's fine, but essential things should come from central resources to ensure equal access."

Added to which, many nursing and doctor's posts are funded by charities; Macmillan funds Macmillan Cancer nurses across the NHS, and CLIC Sargent's cancer charity say they fund over 60 medical and clinical posts within the NHS.

Heavy-handed NHS

But the goodwill from charities is running thin. Recently the NHS caused anger with draconian measures demanding payment from patients who dare to top up treatment to pay for new drugs. The same drugs that would automatically be given to them the other side of the Channel, and funded by the appropriate health service. In Britain NICE takes so long to approve these that patients could wait years. Years when time is of the essence.

If a patient's Oncologist believes a certain drug might extend their lives, he or she has two options: the Oncologist can keep quiet, knowing the NHS won't pay for the drug. Or if they tell them about it, and the patient decides to pay for it themselves, the NHS steps in and says it is against NHS principles for patients to top-up their own treatment.

Pay thousands out of their own pockets for the drugs, and the NHS insists they also pay for all of the rest of their ongoing treatment, even if they would receive this under the normal NHS regime. A double and undeserved whammy.

Critics of NHS policy have pointed out that anyone wanting dental treatment will automatically have to pay top-up fees. The Daily Telegraph called the NHS's action illegal, pointing out that when taxpayers have paid into the system all their lives, it is against the law to demand they pay for something to which they have already contributed.

In Britain not only is approval procedure cumbersome - and oncologists say inefficient - but recent think tanks have questioned why NICE doesn't 'stop re-inventing the wheel' and use information obtained from drug trials abroad? With European post cancer survival rates superior to Britain's (we lag around 17th in European tables) it is surely only arrogance that stops NICE from using the same data?

The NHS's narrow-minded attitude has incensed the public, and caused the cancer 'czar, Mike Richards, to call for a review, promised for October - but there might be an explosion before this.

Verité Reily Collins

http://after-cancer.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Verite_Reily_Collins