A lesbian couple have won the right to NHS treatment to help them have a baby after threatening to sue health chiefs. NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (GGC) had denied Caroline Harris and Julie McMullan IVF treatment as they were not classified as an infertile couple. The health board said it had reviewed its position in light of regulations, including the Equality Act. The women, who were suing the health board for treatment costs, said they had not yet been offered a settlement. The couple were claiming £20,000 after unsuccessful private fertility treatment, which followed them being refused NHS help. They had taken their case to the Court of Session in Edinburgh and a judicial review of the decision was due to take place at a later date. The health board at first stood by its refusal, but it has now agreed to offer the couple treatment at an assisted conception unit.
A LESBIAN couple have won the right to IVF on the NHS after a legal tussle, ahead of laws that will put same-sex patients on an equal footing with heterosexuals. The couple, who remain anonymous, had to go through a legal fight to push the NHS to fund IVF because, at the moment, individual trusts decide whether they wish to pay for treatment for lesbians. The couple were initially refused IVF by their primary care trust because they were of the same sex. One of the women had polycystic ovarian syndrome, which disrupts ovulation, and is one of the most common causes of infertility. From October, clinics will no longer be able to block lesbians by referring to a child’s “need for a father”. Instead, same-sex couples will need to demonstrate only that they can offer “supportive parenting”.
More than 80% of NHS primary care trusts in England fail to offer the recommended three free cycles of IVF to infertile couples, an MP has claimed. The Department of Health says 30% of PCTs provide three cycles of the fertilisation treatment. But Tory MP Grant Shapps, who has contacted every PCT, says these figures are out of date. A "postcode lottery" operates, with rules on age, relationships and other children varying widely, he insists. In some cases women who would be deemed too old for treatment by one PCT would be seen as too young by another.
This article examines the implications for patient care, and for the future of rationing within the NHS, of the recent decision to permit NHS patients to supplement their care by paying for medicines — mainly expensive new cancer drugs — which are not available within the NHS. The starting point is the recommendations of the Richards' Report and their implementation through new guidance issued by the DoH and NICE. Practical challenges arise from the insistence upon the 'separate' delivery of self-funded medicines, and more flexible cost-effectiveness thresholds for end of life medicines may have repercussions for other patients. While undoubtedly part of the trend towards explicit rationing, top-up fees might also represent a significant step towards regarding the NHS as a core, basic service. Finally, the issue of top-up fees is located within the broader context of current cancer research priorities and persisting health inequalities.