My post on the person suing NHS was taken down

I'll post my original post too.

As a comparison, here's the guidance on breast reduction, which I know a lot of women have been denied on the NHS, even when they are in real pain.

www.nhs.uk/conditions/breast-reduction-on-the-nhs/

I thought these quotes were fairly pertinent.

"if it's done to improve appearance rather than for health reasons, it's not normally available on the NHS. Instead, you'll need to pay for the procedure privately."

"The availability of breast reduction surgery on the NHS varies, depending on the eligibility criteria decided by your local clinical commissioning group (CCG)."

"Some CCGs do not fund breast reduction surgery at all, and others fund it selectively if you fulfil certain criteria."

"It's sometimes possible to reduce problems caused by having large breasts without the need for surgery... Breast reduction surgery will usually only be available on the NHS if you have first tried alternative measures."

The BMA have said it's not a medical condition. In any case, the NHS can't prescribe puberty blockers to children which seems to be the crux of their case. They can't possibly win, what are they thinking?

That article is confused and confusing. Unfortunately by lumping together adults and children, their argument got a little wonky. Also, I think this is where we might start seeing the problem that the doctrine of gender identity is going to cause those who suffer gender dysphoria.

The doctrine is at the root of concerted efforts to demedicalise/depathologise being trans. If being trans is not a medical condition, an underfunded and understaffed healthcare system cannot justify putting extra funding into "trans healthcare".

In the US, they were very careful to ensure gender dysphoria was reclassified from a mental health issue to a sexual health issue in order to ensure that insurance companies would still cover it.

But that mechanism doesn't work here, because we have a different system.

Our system categorises accutely life-threatening, longer term life-saving and life-improving (I'm sure there's proper names for that). And treats almost all free at the point of care (with some exceptions for immigrants and tourists/business travellers).

So what are these patients asking for? Hormones, various cosmetic surgeries, but these are all about appearance. Life-improving. So why would the NHS put extra funding in? Distress? I know patients who had mental health issues because certain parts of their body were not as they felt they should be. Causing anxieties, depression and distress, often debilitating and affecting their day-to-day life. They still don't get a right to have cosmetic surgery on the NHS.

And it's wrong to say that they're just asking for the same treatment as everyone else and asking for what everyone else is entitled to. They're not. The NHS must prioritise by design. We don't all have the exact same right to treatment. Life threatening conditions and injuries take precedence. Then life-saving and then we get to life-improving.

And in the latter category are a whole range of elective surgeries and treatments (elective here just means it's not an emergency but scheduled in advance). And the NHS gets to these procedures as they are able, but life-saving ones are prioritised. Yes, we have waiting list targets, but those are frequently missed. That's true across all fields. Especially because funds are an issue.

Hence the comments perceiving this lawsuit in less than favourable terms.

I will repost my post from the earlier thread:

Apparently only "haters" think the NHS should prioritise cancer patients. How very typically TRA.

I will add, it reminds me of this tone deaf campaign that breast cancer sufferers were being prioritised over FTM trans people for breast surgery.

mobile.twitter.com/tobysinbad/status/1041589969410838529?lang=en

As I understand it these treatments are only cosmetic i.e. making non functioning body parts that are just aesthetics. This shouldn’t be done on the NHS anyway?

I have no words.

In America health insurance covers a lot of ‘treatment’ that males want, and because they have insurance, they get the procedures. Over here our NHS is already under huge pressure and cannot cope with peoples desires….unless it is a medical procedure it just won’t get priority.

I’m almost glad they are suing as shows how batshit crazy the situation is

Tal45 thank you for that, I was going to ask what the wait time was.

I’m asking for what we are entitled to, what everybody else already has and has had for many years.

What healthcare are people who identify as transgender being denied which is provided for everyone else?

Being transgender is not a medical condition. The NHS doesn't have to provide treatment for this since there is no medical condition to treat.

My son waited 18 months for an ASD first appointment, didn't occur to me to sue. There isn't enough money/staff so suing the NHS doesn't seem like it would help really does it. Perhaps raising money for the NHS would be a better route to go down - guess that wouldn't pay their private surgery bill though.

Suing the NHS for not giving them 'treatment' fast enough for something that's now not recognised as an illness or disorder.

Who else would be entitled to get their breasts removed or enlarged, or cosmetic facial surgery free on the NHS ''just 'cause''?

I genuinely have nothing to say. The words just won't form...

Hmm I've had my surgery cancelled 3 times after having waited 2.5 years and have now been told that I need another scan before I can have my surgery (due to the length of time) so another 6-9 months for the scan and then back onto the surgical waiting list (which is growing daily) and this is normal for orthopaedic surgery round here, I wonder if the glp would represent me

I’m asking for what we are entitled to, what everybody else already has and has had for many years.

Gotta parse that sentence carefully.

I sure my mum who is waiting for a heart procedure would have plenty to say.

Someone on the other thread linked an earlier Daily Mail article and noted that (unlike the OP's link) all the comments were positive. Given that only five comments are on the article (pretty odd for any online paper, never mind the DM) I reckon that some heavy pruning went on.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4372155-15k-loan-for-surgery
I read a thread like that and then see the article linked above.
Breathtaking arrogance doesn't cover it.

If its not a medical condition, or diagnosed gender dysphoria then surgery shouldnt be available on the NHS.

I really loathe it when people sue the NHS. I very much appreciate that it needs to be held to account and there are occasions when suing is appropriate but this definitely isn't one of them.

We need proper research. Why should the NHS fund treatment that is not proven and/or potentially harmful

Zipped

It'd be good for lawyers?

Very true.