Advanced search

Baby denied treatment by NHS because family have overstayed

(521 Posts)
wonderstuff Thu 14-Mar-13 22:12:30

Baby will be permanently disabled, losing use of one arm if she isn't treated soon. NHS trust are refusing treatment, because although the baby was born here her fathers work visa ran out several years ago. They are being supported by an uncle. I think that the child should be treated, she is innocent and I'm really saddened by the number of people posting comments by this article saying they agree with the NHS stance on this.

What do you think?

WidowWadman Fri 15-Mar-13 10:41:00

NHS entitlement has nothing to do with citizenship - just residency. I'm not a citizen, but am a resident, who's entitled to NHS care.

ArbitraryUsername Fri 15-Mar-13 10:41:07

Unfortunately the abilities of governments in their abilities to make provisions for these rights will differ. Which is why there's stuff in there about (e.g.) how primary education (as a minimum) should be free and richer states should help other states to ensure this. The uk can provide healthcare and education to all children living within it's borders.

givemeaclue Fri 15-Mar-13 10:44:27

She isn't being left to rot! She is being seen by the nhs as an outpatient!

Goldmandra Fri 15-Mar-13 10:45:17

Seeing her isn't treating her!

TheNebulousBoojum Fri 15-Mar-13 10:46:43

Where would you like to see funds redirected from within the NHS to pay for cases like this, Jacqueline?
IVF? Obesity/smoking initiatives? Where would you take the money from to enable all children resident, legally or not, to get free health care for whatever they need?

OneLittleToddleTerror Fri 15-Mar-13 10:49:25

Even UK citizens have to pay for NHS treatment. My PIL are born and bred English for as many generations as you can look back. They migrated to NZ some 30 years ago. When they were here visiting last year, MIL paid to see our GP despite being British (They aren't naturalised kiwis btw. Their only nationality is British).

The dad's visa ran out in 2009. The child is born after 2009. They are overstayers. I don't see a reason why NHS has to give them free treatment.

To put myself in their shoes, I'd have gone home.

ReallyTired Fri 15-Mar-13 11:00:01

The family have overstayed long enough. They should be put in handcuffs and put on the first plane back home tonight. It is unfair on honest immigrants to allow them to stay.

WidowWadman Fri 15-Mar-13 11:00:13


NHS entitlement is there for all UK residents. Citizenship is not neccessary for entitlement to treatment. Do you want to change that?

TheNebulousBoojum Fri 15-Mar-13 11:02:15

Not at all, what gave you that impression confused

soapnuts Fri 15-Mar-13 11:03:47

childbirth is not free if you're not resident in the uk - i'm a uk citizen but not resident and i had to pay. having said that it was about a 10th of theprice it would have cost me for equivalent care elsewhere albeit without the swanky private room - pretty good value for money if you ask me. they've got really hot on chasing it recently and why shouldn't they? where else in the world would this even be a question because where else has healthcare free at the point of delivery?

sad as it is for the child it would set a dangerous precedent and nhs just cant afford it.

thekidsrule Fri 15-Mar-13 11:03:48

this has been on our local news

what i dont get and probably flamed is that the family have two other young children either twins or about 2-3yrs old

his visa ran out in 2009 but they clearly have had 3 children in that time,that is irresponsible in my view when they have no legal right to be in this country

OneLittleToddleTerror Fri 15-Mar-13 11:13:41

@ReallyTired It is unfair on honest immigrants to allow them to stay.

Exactly. There are many honest immigrants who will never overstay. It's a worry in our minds and that's why DH and I chose to move here when we graduated instead of the US. (DH moved to NZ with his parents when he was a wee boy). But US is much better for PhDs in tech. Most of the PhDs we graduated with are in the US now. And strangely most married US citizens grin.

ArbitraryUsername Fri 15-Mar-13 11:13:56

Yes but you're still talking about the parents and their choices/actions. The children haven't chosen to overstay a visa; they've had no choice in the matter. Most people seem quite happy to punish children for their parents actions.

The better question to ask is: why the parents have been able to stay here and have multiple children given that their visas are no longer valid? There are plenty of provisions in uk law to remove people who have no right to remain in the country. Given the visas ran out in 2009, it seems that the ukba haven't been doing their job properly. The ukba seem to have 'allowed' them to stay (in the sense that they haven't made use of their powers to remove them).

Mrsdavidcaruso Fri 15-Mar-13 11:24:02

Arbitary - where was the UNCRC when my Baby died? where was the healthcare provision when the NHS closed my local A&E, What about children of UK citizens who are denied treatment on the NHS due to post code lottery and other funding issues are they not covered by the UNCRC?

This is how I see it.

If the parents had gone on TV and said, we are illegal immigrants and we cant get free NHS care please help us get the money, my purse would have been open and I would have looked at ways to help them raise the money, a lot of UK citizens would have done the same.

But no, we are being asked to support people who have shown they have no respect for the law by over staying, but who now want to use our laws to get them free treatment that they are NOT entitled to.

ReallyTired Fri 15-Mar-13 11:25:51

"Given the visas ran out in 2009, it seems that the ukba haven't been doing their job properly. The ukba seem to have 'allowed' them to stay (in the sense that they haven't made use of their powers to remove them). "

Yes, the UKBA has not done their job properly, however the family have taken advantage and broken the law. Frankly this family should be deported ASAP.

There are heart breaking cases of children suffering all round the world. Why is Sanika more deserving than other children? I feel that more good can be done by over seas aid going to support programmes like

flying eye hospital

This little boy in syria is every bit as deserving as Sanika.

drainpipes for limbs

Sometimes you have to be cold and unemotional to help as many people as possible. Otherwise you get a situaiton where the cute and highly photogenic baby girl gets more help than the baby boy with a major facial disfigurement.

As I have said previously, this family should be sent home ASAP and not get ANY further NHS treatment.

Goldmandra Fri 15-Mar-13 11:35:47

As I have said previously, this family should be sent home ASAP and not get ANY further NHS treatment.

The system in the UK, for whatever reason, has not yet reached the point where the family is being removed from the country. The UK is allowing them to remain. Therefore the UK should take responsibility for the welfare of the child.

Trazzletoes Fri 15-Mar-13 13:37:17

Goldmandra but should this family not have taken responsibility for itself and left of their own accord before the visa expired?

It is rare that there is a good reason for overstaying. In fact, I can't think of one. If their argument is that they fear persecution in Bangladesh then they should have claimed asylum as soon as that became apparent which, if it were a reason for overstaying, would have been in 2009 and would have been done and dusted by now.

If it were a lack of resources, there are organisations who will organise returns.

Yes, the Government needs to get better at removing those who are here illegally, but should this family then be absolved of all responsibility? The parents made a choice to overstay. They chose to break the law.

Goldmandra Fri 15-Mar-13 14:05:18

Goldmandra but should this family not have taken responsibility for itself and left of their own accord before the visa expired?


However they didn't. Our system is allowing them to remain here for now and the child has no say in where she is. She is here, her injury occurred here and should be treated equally to all other children who are here.

AThingInYourLife Fri 15-Mar-13 14:21:04

I'm torn on this but most persuaded by Northern.

This family isn't entitled to free treatment.

Who is to lose out to provide it?

NotADragonOfSoup Fri 15-Mar-13 14:32:27

I assume this treatment isn't available in Bangladesh?

ThePathanKhansAmnesiac Fri 15-Mar-13 14:37:38

Treat her.Just that.

expatinscotland Fri 15-Mar-13 15:00:46

Heartless? Heartless is that proton-beam therapy won't be available here until 2017, a treatment that has been saving the lives of children with cancer. The holdup is expense. So families here have to raise the money themselves or petition to get it paid for, for British children, or their child dies.

Overstayers are criminals. Their actions make it more and more difficult for any honest immigrants and now, even students. No one 'let' them stay therefore the NHS should pay for them. They broke the law! Now they want treatment for free, too.

Trazzletoes Fri 15-Mar-13 15:38:55

Soupy I would imagine that that question is at the basis of their immigration appeal.

But if its not life-saving treatment, that question is, in the eyes of the law, basically irrelevant. She would have to be at imminent risk of death on return to Bangladesh to be allowed to stay here on the basis of ill health.

Gold the difficulty is where do you draw the line then? At 16? At 18? And then people with sick children from impoverished countries will find the means to get here and get world-class free treatment for their child. Of course that is something that should be available to everyone on the planet, but it would completely break the NHS.

And yes, that IS what would happen. I have lost count of the number of women I have had to tell that their baby is not British after they arrived here heavily pregnant, believing that that would be the case.

NotADragonOfSoup Fri 15-Mar-13 15:45:51

I note that they can afford to engage the services of a solicitor for a judicial review. Are those free?

I also think it largely irrelevant whether the treatment is available in Bangladesh TBH. The NHS aren't refusing to treat her, they are refusing to do it free of charge. I can't imagine they have any grounds to use their daughters health as the basis for their appeal to stay given they should have left well before she was even conceived.

SPBInDisguise Fri 15-Mar-13 15:51:13

" wonderstuff

Wow. I would find the money...If I was the decision maker and I decided a child should be permanently disabled, I wouldn't be able to look at myself in the mirror."

Can you find the money then?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now