HearFromYourMP

Comments

• Posted by Shirley Collier, 15:37, Tue 17 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I believe that people should have the choice as to whether or not to purchase additional drugs if they have the means to do so, without losing their right to the treatment under the NHS. To make it an 'either or' is inhumane.

• Posted by Ben Gonshaw, 15:42, Tue 17 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  On the face of it, it seems like a good principle, especially if a budget has been set for a particular treatment and the patient can pay the difference to gain access to a drug that was deemed too expensive for use in the NHS, but has proven to be effective.

  However, it also sets a dangerous precedent. I have no doubt that the bill would be used as intended in the short term. It is not too hard to envisage these powers being used to reduce the amount spent on drugs in the NHS while the cost burden is shifted onto the patients.

  Even if this is not explicit, I can see this being a budgetary consideration when making decisions about drugs in the future. Where borderline cases may have been granted permission to be used by the NHS in the past, these will all fall into the top-up category in future. There would be an inevitable slide towards more top-up drugs over time, not to make drugs available but to reduce costs.

  So while the principle is sound there needs to be clearly explicit legislation surrounding this to ensure that this option is not abused for monetary reasons. However, building such wording would be complicated and difficult.

  Providing that the proper safeguards can be constructed I would favour this legislation.

• Posted by brian bromley, 17:06, Tue 17 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  Personally,I believe that provided the facility can be provided on a National basis, I believe that patients should be able to pay for additional drugs which are not available on the NHS.I would not want the facility to become a post-code lottery, which I believe would be most unfair. Additionally, ANY drugs freely available to patients in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, should also be available to patients in England, on the same basis.

• Posted by Ravinder P S Harar, 17:18, Tue 17 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  Top up fees go against the principles of equity.

  If the drugs are cost effective, NICE will approve them.

  If NICE has not reviewed any new drugs, then NHS patients should be allowed to pay for them, provided they agree to be part of an audit study.

  Drugs rejected by NICE should not be available on the NHS. We do not want a 2 tier service.

• Posted by Hamza Beg, 21:43, Tue 17 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  It seems Ben Gonshaw has it spot on. The idea itself could be extremely useful but we need to look at regulating the use and classification of top-up drugs otherwise, it is us the people who will suffer in an attempt to reduce the burden on the NHS. Until the legislation can be drafted to stop that likely set of events then we shouldn't be committing to something that is going to be used in the wrong way.

• Posted by Carolynne Spencer, 21:48, Tue 17 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I think it is a heart rendering choice. Top up's seem to be a logical choice but isn't there the risk that in the end there will be no NHS. I think we have to protect the NHS ethos otherwise it will be to easy for it do disappear.

• Posted by Mrs. E. Yerolemides, 22:52, Tue 17 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  One has to look at the alternative choice . If a patient is in a borough that cannot afford the drugs they have to go without. Why would anyone want this if they can afford to pay for them. As for the fear of a two tier system, contrary to the expectations of most, I suspect that it will go the way of the residential care home situation. Those who can will HAVE to pay and others will get it for free anyway.

• Posted by Arif Khan, 15:50, Thu 19 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  The problem with top up fees is that it creates a two-tier system; one for the rich who can afford drugs not prescribed by the NHS and one for the poor who cannot afford to pay. Once the precedence is set, NICE will become more obstructive to authorising new medicines on the NHS if it becomes transparent that people are willing to pay for it. This will become the demise of a free NHS system that has served exceptionally well over the years for people requiring care.

  The concept of top up fees whilst understandable in some cases is sure to be abused by the medical system, as money will always be a limiting factor that influences what is on NHS and what is not. Nevertheless, care should never be rejected on the basis of an individual choosing a particular source of medicine; NHS should always be supporting those in need.

  Conclusion, please let’s not create a two-tier system, no post code lottery, no advantages or disadvantages for some and not others, lets try and understand why some medicines are not prescribed under NHS and ways that they can be. We should not tinker with the system from the periphery but resolve the source of the problems and shortcomings of the NHS.

• Posted by M Sajid, 16:25, Fri 20 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  This is the start (some say already started) two tier NHS system. First class treatment given to the minority who can pay for better drugs. While the majority of the population getting 2nd class treatment on the NHS.

• Posted by Patrick Brennan, 10:01, Sat 21 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  When someone is suffering from a life threatening illness, neither they or their family should have the worry about funding their treatment. If drugs are available that can prolong their life or manage their illness, then those drugs should be provided by the state. To with hold them on the grounds of cost, is to my mind a form of assisted suicide. However, where a person is suffering from a long term non life threatening illness, it should not be the states responsibility to provide funding for any extra drugs, but that person should have the right to purchase at their own expense any treatment which may alleviate their condition, without the threat of their NHS treatment being withdrawn.

• Posted by brian bromley, 12:24, Sat 21 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  M Sajid.....It is all very well talking about a second class Health Service, but if certain life-saving drugs are only available in some parts of the UK and not in others it then it automatically becomes second class. Under these circumstances, what are people living in areas where these drugs are not available supposed to do, just curl up and die?

• Posted by M Sajid, 21:28, Sun 22 February 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  brian bromley.....No one wants to see people curl up and die, with the top-up fee proposal in my opinion more PCTs will stop offering to pay for life saving drugs for financial reasons. And start to push individuals towards the top-up route for drugs. Making the health care postcode lottery worse.

Commenting on this message is now disabled.