Cuts to sexual health services imminent.

I was baffled by why the council was getting involved in family planning and sexual health clinics then saw in England they had passed clinics to councils. A mad decision as this is an integral part of the health services

Councils having responsibility for sexual health is utterly barking.

If the council fails to provide decent family planning and sexual health services the costs mostly fall on the NHS (e.g. increased abortion rate and maternity costs).

Family planning should be managed by the NHS they have more of an incentive to get it right.

I don’t think it’s any coincidence that the (Tory!) government in England decentralises and puts responsibilities for public health on to local councils.

Makes it much more politicised and way harder for us to push back and campaign nationally against council cuts when there are a myriad of different providers and approaches in play.

They have literally managed to wash their hands of responsibility for public health provision. This and other measures were so divisive that Andrew Lansley got called toxic and was binned as Health Secretary- but when Jeremy Hunt came in he’s done nothing to reverse it. Was all a fake show of disapproval and scapegoating.

Finally I have heard that Council budgets have been slashed less horrendously in Tory voting areas but I haven’t got stats to hand to prove that. But there’s no question these are ideological, savage cuts.

Just to make the point as well that not only are things like gonorrhoea increasing in incidence, but they’re becoming multi drug resistant as well. Cutting basic sexual health services is a terrible idea - it will have serious cost and health impacts down the line.

J4 sexual health/family planning clinics provide a range of services to women that many GP surgeries cannot, such as coil insertion (the Mirena coil is prescribed for a range of medical conditions such as heavy periods, not just as birth control) and removal, smear tests.

Maybe it will free up funds for the nhs to save lives

Did you read the article? This is not NHS money being saved - these services are run by local councils, who are gradually cutting all services despite increases in Council Tax.

In actual fact, this will cost the NHS money - people will take up GP appointments when they could have gone to a clinic, people will go untreated and need major treatment possibly for life, women may need IVF because of untreated STDs destroying their fertility, those with HIV could infect many others unknowingly, and so on.

I’m sure it’s easier for you to condemn users are promiscuous when that’s not necessarily the case. When I first went to a GUM clinic, I’d had one sexual partner only. People also go there when they’ve been raped or sexually assaulted. Or if they just want to make sure their sexual health is in order, or they want contraception etc.

J4Nice 🙄

Did you mean to come across so smugly? Let's hope your husband feels the same as you then. It would be awful if you got an STI from him sleeping around and couldn't access the healthcare you needed.

J4Nice if you think 'sleeping around' is the only reason to visit a clinic, you're clearly in a very fortunate area where GP services aren't restricted.

In my area, GP's refer you to the local sexual health clinic, (who then refer you to a hospital for fitting) if you want a coil for medical reasons, or an implant. The clinic runs every other week as it is. Once it's in, the GP surgery won't check it, so you're back there whenever you have an issue. We also have 3 weeks + waits for appointments, so people end up using this clinic to get pretty much standard contraception sorted.

This really scares me. I know what I've described above probably isn't 'the norm' in most areas, but I don't see how we can function with even more cuts here.

I didn't realise how devastating congenital syphilis could be until I saw Martin Freeman's 'Who do you think you are'.

That was after getting and A in my A/O human biology and covering it in Part 1 Biology at uni (we were banned from writing essays on it though as the lecturer said marking piles of them made him itch).

It is surprising the people died from tertiary syphilis before antibiotics came available.

In the good old days, everything was national. To fight cuts took a national campaign which sorted the problem everywhere. It was difficult but it was still possible to fight the Government.

The Government response was to break the public sector up into ever smaller pieces. Now anyone wanting to fight this has to do it one council at a time. The effort becomes disproportionate. So it doesn't happen and services close.

I suspect there is another motive. Gradually crank up the gaps in the NHS and more and more people will decide that health insurance is their only option. That's the political goal, I am sure.

J4nice

I went to a sexual health clinic to have my coil removed (that was in the wrong position and causing me a lot of pain), because my GP surgery refused to help. I don't know what I would have done if that clinic didn't exist.

Will we turn into one of those countries where patients have to show insurance / ability to pay costs before they receive treatment?

And this in the same week that an upsurge in syphilis and gonorrhoea cases is reported.

Maybe it will free up funds for the nhs to save lives

It never have and never will use a sexual health clinic because I don't sleep around and take risks

Well, I'm alright Jack

There are many, many people do not sleep around - you are not unique, but the system is there for if you are caught out. It is better for the public health, saves money and benefits everyone if there are services for everyone so that the general public is not going around riddled with syphilis and HIV and silent chlamydia, and that it is easily accessed.

I certainly do not begrudge sexual health clinics to anyone.

Gay men and straight women impacted most, first group is small in the scheme of things, second group is still demonized when it comes to sex related matters as we see from pp. Thing is straight women who are ill, has impact on children both already born and ? impact of these diseases on pregnancy/ baby.

This is why it is bloody vital to get people to understand why their vote matters in local elections!

Not all councils are going about their new Public Health responsibilities in the same way. They should not be reducing the total public health spend, but may re-prioritise with it. It is local councillors who decide whether proposed changes pass.

get the impression that the country is being run down in preparation for a big change.

The NHS is being systematically run into the floor. In a few years there will be some sort of small pricing change introduced - nothing huge, probably just an access charge.
Then once that mechanism for pricing is in place the whole thing will be dismantled at great profit to a few and insurance based systems brought in.

I was baffled by why the council was getting involved in family planning and sexual health clinics then saw in England they had passed clinics to councils. A mad decision as this is an integral part of the health services.
In Scotland they have (in theory but not really in practise) integrated health and social services but family planning/GU clinics are still ran by the health boards.

This is ideological. Many people in power do not believe in the public sector. As a result, it is being starved of funds and systematically run down.

You see it with the NHS, schools and local authorities.

What's next? Private companies step in to provide the services at a cost and to make a profit. Goodbye public sector. The vultures are circling already.

This is horrible, burdens women disproportionately and less advantaged people, and younger people AND is entirely predictable.

This is what everyone said would happen when Andrew Lansley (Tory Health Sec) devolved public health funding to local councils ie No longer NHS funded directly.
Then did savage cuts to local council budgets.

I can look up the stats, but it’s something shocking like 30 or 40% cuts since pre-2010 when the coalition came in.

This was all predicted by the health think tanks and economists, not that you need to be an economist to know if you divest central government of something and then slash the budget that you will be slashing the service.

It’s infuriating. The government also slap their own backs about the decline in the teenage pregnancy rates over recent decades. Good luck with that in future. They couldn’t give a crap about keeping young people healthy and safe.

Upstart may not be being tin-foil-hatty on this one. In the run up to rail privatisation, the then government deliberately let the routine maintenance programme slide in order to make the network look artificially more profitable than it actually was. Then of course the private companies were left with an under financed poorly maintained system. IIRC it was referenced in connection with the Hatfield crash in the subsequent enquiry: lack of routine inspections led to the corner gauge cracking not being picked up in time.

*upstart^

So its not about saving money. I get the impression that the country is being run down in preparation for a big change

It is about saving money. There’s no money today so services are being cut. I guess the councils will just deal with the consequences in a few years.

It's so short sighted! The long term consequences of cutting something that applies to so many young people.

“"While we appreciate the value that discretionary services such as Cripps add to patient choice and access, during times of severe cuts to our operating budgets we cannot continue to provide those which are additional and complementary to core provision,"
Cuts to student clinics are particularly irresponsible - I would imagine they are heavy users and have less ability to travel to more distant clinics. Also, for many this is their first experience of living away from home and taking responsibility for their own health. It needs to be readily accessible for them.

There is nothing “discretionary” about sexual health. Especially when antibiotic super resistant bugs are emerging.

We are so lucky with family planning provision in this country, thanks to the NHS.

This is a link to an article from USA which gives a glimpse of what we can expect if family planning goes the way of sexual health.
www.good.is/articles/birth-control-costs-more-than-you-think-even-for-the-lucky-ones

This is terrible. I had no idea sexual health had been off loaded from the NHS to councils wholesale, where of course provision is bound to be piecemeal and subject to cuts. I knew Virgin had taken over quite a lot of these services but still thought it was under the auspices of the NHS.