HIV Treatment Rights Review
posted: 23/06/2010
Wednesday 30 June is the last chance to tell the Department of Health whether its plan to update the law and official guidance on who is entitled to free NHS hospital treatment is right. At present some migrants with HIV are charged for HIV treatment, although every other sexually transmitted infection (STI) and infectious disease is always treated for free, for everyone. The rules affect lots of other people in other ways but our focus is on access for all people in this country to free HIV treatment.
Free treatment for STIs like HIV, and infectious diseases makes financial and disease management sense. It saves money and stops diseases spreading when states provide free treatment for these for public health reasons. Untreated conditions spread diseases and increase the total bill.
New Regulations - useful changes
The new regulations propose some useful changes:
- Refused asylum seekers getting Section 4 or Section 95 support will be exempt from charges
- Primary care services are explicitly excluded from charging
- Unaccompanied migrant children will be exempt from charges
- People with an Article 3 claim will be included alongside people seeking asylum or humanitarian protection, and so will be exempt from charges
New Guidance - some good bits
The new official Guidance is also better:
- Maternity treatment is now defined as 'immediately necessary' treatment. This means there will always be a right to treatment and it must be provided. But a bill could follow.
- The Guidance does not yet say, but we are hopeful that HIV will also be defined as ‘Immediately necessary treatment’ because that is what the British HIV Association has formally told the Department of Health.
- Overseas Visitors Managers and clinicians are instructed to tell patients that all ‘immediately necessary’ treatment will not be withheld, regardless of their ability to pay.
Want to help?
The major problem with the rules is that there is still no automatic right to free HIV treatment. The Department of Health says it is reviewing this rule. We think this shouldn't wait a moment longer and HIV community organisations are making the case now for free HIV treatment for all.
The review of the rules and guidance was started before the election. Now there has been a change of government, an emergency budget, cuts and more cuts to come in the autumn Spending Review, so it is important to support the positive changes they have made. We want to push the Department of Health to take the sensible next step of adding HIV treatment to the list of Sexually Transmitted Infections and Infectious Diseases which are all treated for free, whoever you may be. And we want to discourage the Government from making some unhelpful changes that it plans.
NAT (National AIDS Trust) response
NAT have prepared a fairly simple response for some HIV organisations. This deals with the key points. You could use this - just add your name and details in the first pages and send it to them by email. You can of course say whatever you wish and make your own points.
If you want to comment in more detail you could look for more in the Model Response you can find on a blog set up by Medact and other community organisations that are campaigning together.
Here are all the Department of Health papers for the consultation.
George House Trust draft response
Here you can read the draft response of George House Trust.
Please note that this is not our final or official view but we are sharing this to help others, before the official deadline. We welcome any comments and suggestions.
We have considerable experience with HIV treatment charging and this draft is built on our experience, expertise, and we are especially grateful to NAT and the blog for their detailed work on this.
This George House Trust draft is more detailed than the NAT response above and it includes some significant additions.
Two of these George House Trust extras are
- much better Guidance is needed on who fits the definition of 'ordinarily resident'. The details are for legal experts BUT this is really important. The poor Guidance on who is 'ordinarily resident' has caused most of the problems with charges for HIV treatment in NW England. We have won almost every case we have argued on this point. We have been able to argue that most migrants with HIV who are charged are in fact 'ordinarily resident' in this country and so should never have been charged. If you can show you are 'ordinarily resident' none of the charging rules apply.
- There is no system for independent reviews or appeals - like there is if your claim for a state benefit is refused, or your asylum claim or immigration appeal is refused. In the 21st century, basic rights like hospital care deserve a system of independent reviews and appeals considered by an independent Tribunal chaired by a judge, so people can obtain justice and justice is seen to be done.
Permalink