Baby denied treatment by NHS because family have overstayed

[wonderstuff]

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/13/erbs-palsy-baby-sanika-ahmed-denied-treatment-_n_2866288.html

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?

There will be other children in Bangladesh who are suffering. Should the NHS treat them?

Immigration procedures can take a while - the parents were likely hoping to be able to hand over proper paperwork but, as has been on the news repeatedly lately, the asylum and immigration systems have a giant backlog (while continuing to put their prices up for the latter at least) so it has taken longer than they have expected. Asylum cases going back ten years are still in process, so there is no guarantee those would be "done and dusted" if that was their route in 2009 and as the article says, they are already in one of the systems and are waiting on a hearing. You can't speed the immigration system up. It is very possible they put in paperwork back then and it is only now is being heard.

As an "honest immigrant", I don't see these people affecting me at all. All the changes to immigration law have been over ideology rather than situations like this -- hence why both parts of a couple must now has to be 21 to bring a spouse over and none of the people caught out by it are from the groups they said they were targeting but have caught out many from Canada and the States and similar, but the change fit their ideology.

I suspect, do to being unable to pay tens of thousands of pounds for the procedures, they were advised to go to the media with it for help but haven't been able to do a very good job of it. It must be hard to scramble a public appeal with a very ill child and immigration at the same time, and may not be able to negotiate a payment plan with the hospital that might make it easier to do so and raise the funds over time as has been done before.

My understanding was that the NHS is available to people who live and / or work in the UK.

So if the family overstayed the visa, but have continued to work, pay taxes, why wouldn't their child be eligible for treatment? They have been working without a visa, but they have still been working. I assume - because they wouldn't have been able to claim benefits.

Therefore the system merrily relieved them of tax and NI without noticing that the visa had expired.

Many possible holes in this assumption, of course.

gimme she can be treated but not for free, if there was an appeal for funds to help the parents pay for the treatment I would be happy to help - just as I have donated money to help 2 UK children get life saving treatment that the NHS will not pay for.

Immigration procedures can take a while

They've had since 2009 to sort out their immigration status.

Agree. I'd happily donate some cash. But I don't agree the system should change. But the op has said she'll find the money anyway.

Therefore the system merrily relieved them of tax and NI without noticing that the visa had expired.

Did it? Have they been paying taxes?

So back to my question that didn't get an answer. Where do you find the funding from?
IVF treatments? Obesity/smoking -related health issues? All areas that have been portrayed as non-essential at some point.
We'd all like to find the funding for every need to be met, but where would you cut?

I've known several overstayers. Believe me, they weren't paying tax and NI. They went to ground after their visa was up. They were working, though.

Same Health Authority
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-21798838

There will be other children in Bangladesh who are suffering. Should the NHS treat them?

No. They are not living here. That is part of a wider debate about the fundamental principle by which those who live in the UK get access to an unfair proportion of the world's wealth and probably a whole other thread.

This child isn't in Bangladesh.

Spork with the greatest respect, I know a lot about the immigration laws and the system in the UK.

Had they applied to extend their visa before it expired, and it was only being decided now, they would still be able to benefit from the NHS. They would not be over-stayers.

Yes there are some outstanding asylum cases going back 10 years. There are relatively few dating back to 2009 and they usually relate to, for example, war criminals. The system was completely redone in 2007 and most home office decisions are made in 6 months. With appeals then following within a month or 2.

Her parents chose to overstay. Yes, they did not know they would have a daughter who is so sick, and it sucks that the daughter will be disabled when there is something that could be done.

As expat says, there are children dying of cancer in this country because something could be done, but the NHS won't pay.

If you allow one child, the floodgates WILL open. Her parents took a chance when breaking the law. If they had stayed in Bangladesh, no doubt they wouldn't even know this operation existed (disclaimer: I know nothing about the Bangladeshi healthcare system).

As many people have said, she can have treatment, but they have to pay. This happens in pretty much every other country in the world. Why should the UK be any different?

Soupy about availability of treatment in Bangladesh... I was looking at the situation from a legal point of view. It's relevant to a visa application but not to the moral argument.

Yes, Legal Aid is often available for Judicial Review.

Blu

My understanding was that the NHS is available to people who live and / or work in the UK.

So if the family overstayed the visa, but have continued to work, pay taxes, why wouldn't their child be eligible for treatment? They have been working without a visa, but they have still been working. I assume - because they wouldn't have been able to claim benefits.

They wouldn't be able to work, either.

Therefore the system merrily relieved them of tax and NI without noticing that the visa had expired.

No it didn't.

Many possible holes in this assumption, of course.

To work legally, you have to have an NI number, work permit, etc.

There is no way for the hospital to find the money for this treatment without a cut to another service. It is as cut and dried as that. The NHS has finite resources and this is what that means. Only treatments that have been authorised can be offered, and that can only be offered to people entitled to receive them.

Every debate on this issue has the same dynamics - people wanting expensive unproven drugs, couples desperate for IVF, people without NHS entitlement. They ALL want help and it's money that's the barrier. Nobody enjots these conversations but it's inevitable with a finite resource. What one person has somebody else therefore cannot have.

Which child with entitlement to NHS treatment shall we deny in order to pay for this case? Your child? Mine?

Fact is that in most places around the world this child would never even have got as far as a clinic visit because you are asked to produce proof of ability to pay before you cross the threshold.

it is very sad. But unless we say the NHS is for every person in the world in medical need, then I don't think exceptions can be made. A charity should pay for the treatment or a private hospital could offer to do the treatment with doctors giving their time free.

How many would pass through 'floodgates' opened to allow children of immigrants born here and who became ill here to be treated here? I am not sure it would be a flood.

This is not health tourism. The parents didn't arrive here because they knew their child would need this surgery.

This is about the child's rights, not the rights of the parents.

My word when did the nhs grow a pair its only the same as any other country that is why you can't travel without insurance this countries health care is hemridgeing out money they have to draw the line somewhere and yes its sad for the family however in the u.s they won't even send an ambulance until they have your payment method and are you insured

Hmm, it is interesting that some of the people here being callous about this child and arguing that it is her parents responsibility...

...are the same ones who wail when there are benefit cuts for work-shirkers with children saying 'but, it is not the children's fault'

Bloody hypocrites. They pretend to care about children and how the actions of parents shouldn't impact children's well-bring. Except, yup know, when it is the child of an immigrant. Well it seems all they want is justification for taking money from the tax-payer to fund their own lifestyles.

Legal Aid is often available for Judicial Review.

As illegal immigrants, are they eligible for legal aid? That seems strange to me.

flarbread No one is being callous, they are being realistic. The NHS is short of funding. What are you going to cut in order to treat the children of illegal immigrants?

Still no answer to that question, NotADragon.
One of the things that astounded many of the Bengali parents of the children I taught was that medical care and doctors were free in this country, unlike Bangladesh.

It is sad but we have cancer sufferers in this country who are being denied treatment due to costs, we have fundraising for children to go abroad for treatment because the NHS cannot afford to provide the treatment. Whether we like it or not, it does boil down to money.

For me, the fact that the parents have only just applied for leave to remain after being told they would have to pay for their daughter's treatment is very telling. It's reasonable to suggest that would still be living under the radar as illegal immigrants if it wasn't for this turn of events.

Why doesn't anyone who feels strongly that this child should have free treatment send them money towards paying for the operation? You could probably send it direct to the hospital in question.

Sadly, the NATIONAL health service cannot pay for all the sick and disabled children in the world to be treated, lovely as that would be. A line has to be drawn. I would rather money went to foreign hospitals treating many suffering DC than to a family here illegally.

My eldest has erbs. He has had a couple of operations - a rotation, plates, etc.

Unless she has such a severe injury that her nerves were totally severed, then it's really unlikely that her arm will be totally paralysed for life. My son had a very severe injury - he also had torticollis - (and the physio I had to do for that was heartbreaking!) and he has quite a bit of use of his arm today.

I doubt the accuracy of the report. I'm sorry, but it just doesn't read right to me, based on my experience of erbs. I'm not trying to claim to be an expert, but it just doesn't seem quite right. You don't 'slowly get paralysed' with erbs palsy. The injury that caused the paralysis happened at birth, as with my son's injury (result of shoulder dystocia). It doesn't get worse after that. It's not degenerative. It's caused by nerve damage during the delivery. The damage is done there and then. My son's arm was totally paralysed at birth because the doctor pulled on his head when he got stuck and she caused extensive nerve damage.

I also doubt that if the op isn't done in a month, that there will be nothing to be done. It just doesn't work like that. I know Jackie is quoted as saying the 9 months is optimal, but everything I have read suggests that if it's surgery on the nerves it can be done up to a year old quite successfully. I know kids who've had surgery later. My own son was 2 and a half when he had his first op.

However. On a personal level, I think it is bloody awful that a baby is not going to be treated. I understand the legalities of it, I get that the NHS is not a bottomless pit, I do, but having a child with this and knowing all they have to go for and how much of a struggle things are - my son is 13 and can't fasten tight buttons, struggles with zips and only managed to learn laces last year and is still hit and miss! Erbs Palsy needs a LOT of treatment. Operations, physio and then there's all the aids you need - splints, etc. I can't help but feel really sorry for that child.

It's also really painful. When my son started to get some sensation back in his arm, he chewed his fingers to the bone. Seriously. We had to splint his arm in the end and he still has scars.