to think that it's not for the nhs to pick up the bill to remove potentially faulty breast implants?

[wannaBe]

There are calls today for women who have had the faulty French breast implants to have them removed on the NHS. Apparently 40000 women have these implants, and to remove all of them would cost the NHS £150 million.

Now, if a woman has had these implants as part of reconstructive surgery following mastectomy then I agree that she should be able to have them removed. But other than that, if you choose to buy yourself bigger breasts (and let's be honest, leaking implants are not a new thing), then it isn't the nhs's responsibility to pick up the tab if there might be a problem.

If your life is in immediate danger then you would obviously need to have surgery on the NHS, but just on the off-chance? I think the company responsible should be the ones picking up the bill and don't see why the taxpayer should shoulder the responsibility for other peoples' vanity.

They haven't got cancer though, most of them probably will never develop cancer.

I'd be interested to see how their statistical risk compares against someone who has already had cancer, because what you're suggesting is these women get special treatment, beyond that of an existing cancer patient.

I'm not happy for the NHS to spend millions funding that.

I'm also not sure why some people seem to think that women who have breast implants are vain, image obsessed TOWIE or Jordan types? Most are just normal women, exactly the same as all the other women out there, who for whatever reason, happened to want bigger/different looking breasts.

But midori they paid for the implants privately, and were able to afford to pay for them.

There are risks to all cosmetic surgery - look at the celebs with trout pouts.

You pay your money, you take your choice, and take the risk of mistakes.

That is totally up to them then midori.
I just don't think it's up to the NHS to pay for it, unless there are health reasons for doing it.

"You pay your money, you take your choice, and take the risk of mistakes"

Absolutely, and that's usually why you can't get NHS corrective surgery when you develop complications after privately-funded cosmetic surgery. But the risk of rupture because of industrial grade silicon isn't a risk these women knew they were taking. Surgeons are very big on informed consent before operating - in these cases, the women didn't consent because they didn't know what was involved.

Altinkum - any idiot who "asks for" breast implants whilst seriously believing that there will be no adverse consequences for other aspects of their health, is either exceptionally stupid or willfully ignorning the obvious (uncomfortable) truth. Who seriously believes that sewing lumps of toxic plastic under their skin is "safe"?

I think caveat emptor applies here.

Changing nickname - I suspect that even if they were insured, there could be questions over the validity of cover if the clinic was using sub-medical grade silicone. I think there could be some interesting litigation here.

oH JEEZ - cannot imagine anyone having a breast implant. I'm a naturual 30g - it's hell, so do't have much sympathy for anyone who wants to be like me.

Howeverl this scandal is a scandal and there are women out there who's health may be at risk and that's what the nhs is for.

The company has been disolved and the ceo has pretty much admitted that the great and good who could pay had the great implants (omg) and the rest had 'industrial' type implants. Wow- if that's what cosmetic surgery has come to the punters should really do their research.

In that case, Emma, they made their choice. They chose to go abroad because it was cheaper and it's ended up being a bad choice.

I'm not unsympathetic to their situation, I'd love a new set of boobs, and a tummy tuck, face lift, brow lift and the rest, but why should the NHS pay out if I chose health tourism and it goes wrong?

"the punters should really do their research"

Yes, they should.

And why should I foot the bill because they didn't?

altinkum, yes I do. In the same way anyone who actuallty has had cancer has to do. The NHS doesn't stretch to funding scans 'cos you're worried. It's tough but it's not a never ending money pot.

altinkum - yes, I do expect the women to live with it - they chose it, no one took them to the clinic with a gun to their heads and made them have the surgery.

If I make a bad decision, and it doesn't work out like I thought it would, I have to suck it up. Tough. I don't see, unless there's imminent risk to life, that it's any different to any other free choice that I or anyone else makes.

I'm not suggesting that the NHS should pay for removal where a rupture isn't present the way things currently stand either. (in my case if a rupture was present my original surgeon would remove and replace the implant without charge)

However, there are some real misconceptions about the type of woman to have implants on this thread and also some real vitriol aimed at them and that should be challenged, the latter is especially unacceptable.

I didn't say they were idiots, but they chose to have surgery that they didn't actually medically need.

Now the consequences aren't what they thought they'd be. Understandably, they are worried. But that does not mean that the NHS should pick up the bill and remove all of these implants.

changingnicknameforxmas not all women with PIP implants went abroad for surgery or had cheap surgery. I certainly did neither.

If there is a high chance of cancer developing we should remove a la NHS. Those who say otherwise are you recommending withholding cancer treatment? Some of you lot make me sick.

"Most might not get cancer or illness from the faulty implants, however at the same time, do you expect woman who this affects and if it mentally bothers them, that they are just to live with it.

even then the insurance company will want each hand every single woman tested/looked at before it will pay out that takes time, and the women mental health seriously affected"

Again. Altinkum, what about cancer patients (like me) who are "mentally bothered" by the risk of cancer recurrence but told that the NHS does not have the resources to provide the recommended follow up?? These are EXACTLY the people who will be given even less if the NHS magically "finds" £150 million to throw at idiots who had cosmetic surgery.

I honestly could not give a flying fig about the mental health of anyone stupid enough to have implants for purely cosmetic reasons.

The NHS should pay/replace cases where reconstructive surgery has occurred.

Private ops should be the responsibility of the buyer, recourse to the insurance company of their surgeon.

Under no circumstances should a person that paid get anything more than straight removal at NHS expense.

In my adult life at no time would I ever believe that placing silicon into my breasts was riskless. I think anyone claiming they've been had is the same as anyone who's been a smoker claiming they've been had. The warnings are there but you make a personal choice to ignore them.

And I looked at breast surgery vis a vis an uplift and small implant and then decided to muddle on with helpful bras, but I can understand why someone would chose this.

Midori - I didn't know that, but my basic point stands. In my opinion, if you paid for them privately, sue the surgeon who put them in for using sub-standard products, sue the company if you can. But unless they rupture or cause imminent danger to life, then they should not be removed on the NHS.

"the punters should really do their research"

Yes, they should.

And why should I foot the bill because they didn't?

And why should I foot the bill for benefits for people who choose to not work?

You could go on forever with that argument if you think that you have some sort of rights over money you've paid in tax.

altinkum seriously, can I ask you why you think these women are more deserving than any woman/man who has had cancer and is at a significantly risk of it returning?

The NHS do not fund 'peace of mind' scanning for these patients. They do not routinely fund preventative surgery 'just in case'.

I'm genuinely curious as to why you think these women deserve such special treatment?