• Cancer survivor refused breast reconstruction operation
    40 replies, posted
[b]Cancer survivor refused breast reconstruction operation after NHS officials dismiss it as 'cosmetic surgery'[/b] [quote=UK newspaper Daily Mail]A cancer sufferer has condemned the NHS ' postcode lottery' after health chiefs refused to fund her breast reconstruction. Mother-of-four Patsy Parsons had a large section of her left breast removed when she was diagnosed two years ago and was told she was entitled to have it rebuilt free of charge. But despite being recommended for a £5,000 bilateral breast augmentation operation - complex surgery which involves inserting implants and uplifting both breasts - by her consultant, the local primary care trust refused to fund it. It said her operation is 'low priority, routine' cosmetic surgery, which is paid for by the NHS only in exceptional circumstances. Last night Mrs Parsons - who has four children aged between two and 14 with her labourer husband, Robert, 35 - said she was the victim of a 'postcode lottery'. Guidelines state all women who undergo a mastectomy - a complete breast removal - should be given reconstruction by the state. However, it is at the discretion of PCTs whether to fund the surgery for women such as Mrs Parsons who have partial breast removals, or lumpectomies. 'I feel completely let down and insulted by the NHS,' said Mrs Parsons, a cafe owner. 'I'm not some celebrity model wanting a boob job to get more pictures in a glossy magazine - I need this to boost my self-esteem. 'Some PCTs are saying they will fund it and some are saying they won't. It's not fair, it should be one rule for everyone across the country. It's a postcode lottery.' Mrs Parsons, 33, was diagnosed with breast cancer after finding a lump in her breast in April 2008. Doctors told her the cancer was aggressive and she needed a partial lumpectomy to remove the tumour and 16 lymph nodes to stop the disease spreading. They reassured her that after her treatment, which included ten months of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, she would be entitled to reconstructive surgery. She also had a hysterectomy in June to improve her chances of beating the cancer for good. Three months later Mrs Parsons, of Stoke- on-Trent, discussed reconstructive surgery at University of Staffordshire Hospital. A consultant recommended she undergo a bilateral breast augmentation and advised it would be paid for by the NHS. So she was devastated when, in December, Stoke-on-Trent PCT refused to fund her operation. Mrs Parsons said her breasts are disfigured and she has been depressed since learning the operation would not happen. Although she appealed, the request was denied twice more. Dr Zafar Iqbal, of Stoke- on-Trent PCT, said he was unable to comment on individual cases, but stressed they would be reconsidering Mrs Parsons' plight. 'The NHS is not in a position to meet all the demands placed upon it,' he said.[/quote] Source: [url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262483/Cancer-survivor-refused-breast-reconstruction-operation-NHS-officials-dismiss-cosmetic-surgery.html#ixzz0jpNJwTqs[/url] GNN news comment: Wasn't she suppose to be able to get that operation?
Chemo patients don't get free wigs, so what's the difference technically speaking? "I need this to boost my self-esteem" is not a medical reason. So I'm kind of on the fence about this one.
Source other than the Daily Mail? They're like :foxnews:, except they have a funny accent. To call them a newspaper is a dishonor to actual UK papers. They're a fucking rag.
Pinch of salt with your Daily Mail article? 'Post code lottery' my arse. It probably happens everywhere.
Only sources that Google News finds are the Daily Mail and the Express, both tabloids not known for journalistic integrity: [url]http://news.google.com/news/story?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&ncl=d1aZJm0TiIF74AMJlwwXuOnXTKoFM[/url]
I hate these evil groups that refuse to help people in need. Go to hell NHS.
[QUOTE=squeaky024;21093061]I hate these evil groups that refuse to help people in need. Go to hell NHS.[/QUOTE] Again, no source besides Daily Mail. I'm calling bullshit.
[QUOTE=PrismatexV8;21093079]Again, no source besides Daily Mail. I'm calling bullshit.[/QUOTE] Probably is, but then again these stories don't usually make the big news guys.
True or not, I still don't know if breast reconstruction surgery should be considered essential.
[QUOTE=squeaky024;21093117]Probably is, but then again these stories don't usually make the big news guys.[/QUOTE] I found a whopping 2 sources on Google News: Daily Mail and The Express, both of which have spotty track records. [url]http://news.google.com/news/story?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&ncl=d1aZJm0TiIF74AMJlwwXuOnXTKoFM[/url]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21092993]Chemo patients don't get free wigs, so what's the difference technically speaking? "I need this to boost my self-esteem" is not a medical reason. So I'm kind of on the fence about this one.[/QUOTE] One is a Wig, Your hair will grow back Your fucking body is partially destroyed; it will not grow back.
I hate how these insurance guys are so stubborn even after a story hits the news against them, it makes them look like total assholes.
[QUOTE=doommarine23;21093135]One is a Wig, Your hair will grow back Your fucking body is partially destroyed; it will not grow back.[/QUOTE] The analogy still works. "Low self esteem" is not a medical condition.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21093176]The analogy still works. "Low self esteem" is not a medical condition.[/QUOTE] I'm not gonna lie, I skimmed through the article so I'm just going to assume she lost one of her breasts. Why can't she get it repaired? At least put some silicon in. Your analogy doesn't work because hair grows back; your body parts do not grow back.
[QUOTE=doommarine23;21093185]I'm not gonna lie, I skimmed through the article so I'm just going to assume she lost one of her breasts. Why can't she get it repaired? At least put some silicon in. Your analogy doesn't work because hair grows back; your body parts do not grow back.[/QUOTE] The time that the person will be without x body feature is not the point I'm trying to make. Breasts are not essential to the normal operation of your body so changing/replacing/augmenting them for any reason is cosmetic. Do I think it should be free for the person though? I honestly don't know.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21093222]The time that the person will be without x body feature is not the point I'm trying to make. Breasts are not essential to the normal operation of your body so changing/replacing/augmenting them for any reason is cosmetic. Do I think it should be free for the person though? I honestly don't know.[/QUOTE] Hair is mostly cosmetic, but it keeps your head warm and offers minor protection. Breasts are used for milk making, sure a silicon insert won't really let her produce milk anymore but at least she won't feel like a freak. Of course, you speak law I speak moral.
[QUOTE=doommarine23;21093245]Hair is mostly cosmetic, but it keeps your head warm and offers minor protection. Breasts are used for milk making, sure a silicon insert won't really let her produce milk anymore but at least she won't feel like a freak. Of course, you speak law I speak moral.[/QUOTE] Morally it should be covered, yes. But when it comes to something like this you [b]do[/b] have to draw a line somewhere.
I dunno, I feel for her but the healthcare system did its job- she's alive and with her family. Yeah I'm sure her quality of life would be vastly improved with a reconstruction, but is that the purpose of the UK's national healthcare system? What about someone who gets a leg amputated, how expensive and high tech a prosthesis is he allowed to get for free? Should you be happy with something that lets you walk or do you need something that looks real and allows you to play soccer?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21093270]Morally it should be covered, yes. But when it comes to something like this you [B]do[/B] have to draw a line somewhere.[/QUOTE] The same could be said of denying burn-victims cosmetic surgeries. It's a double-edged sword, medicine and doctors are to help people no matter how minor; that's what I believe. I mean hey; your face is all fucked up but you're alive right? It's a-okay than That's not how it works.
Somehow I get the feeling this has more to do with her consultant offering her a "excessive" procedure, at least in the eyes of the invisible accountants.
Damn those people funneling money to those people on life support! Damn them from taking away our right to look at bosoms!
If the breast is really mutilated or is now just a dent or something, then by all means give her the implants. If it looks fine and normal, but just a bit smaller than before, then I don't think she really needs the implants.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21093124]True or not, I still don't know if breast reconstruction surgery should be considered essential.[/QUOTE] Well I'd be pretty fucking depressed if I had one saggy disfigured breast. You can't really hide something like that unless you have a big puffy jacket and c'mon, who wants to wear one of those outside of winter? I'd say it's pretty essential, perhaps ESPECIALLY essential because it's cosmetic, because appearences are pretty much how we judge the worth of one another right? At least initially...
[QUOTE=squeaky024;21093117]Probably is, but then again these stories don't usually make the big news guys.[/QUOTE] Because they're not news, all this is a case of is "Oh no I've been denied cosmetic treatment, I know I'll email the Daily Mail and they'll pay me!"
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21092993]Chemo patients don't get free wigs, so what's the difference technically speaking? "I need this to boost my self-esteem" is not a medical reason. So I'm kind of on the fence about this one.[/QUOTE] Tits don't grow back. Anyway this lady wants to feel like a woman, not a hunchback with one breast.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21093270]Morally it should be covered, yes. But when it comes to something like this you [b]do[/b] have to draw a line somewhere.[/QUOTE] The point is more when she GOT the surgery she was TOLD she would be able to get it reconstructed Then afterward they said she couldn't
[URL="http://www.debenhams.com/women/lingerie-nightwear/bras#ps=default&storeId=10001&sfn=Categories&lid=%2F%2Fproductsuniverse%2Fen_GB%2Fproduct_online%3DY%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661%7D%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661_18663%7D%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661_18663_18441%7D%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661_18663_18441_65733_ms%7D&catalogId=10001&sfv=Mastectomy+bras"]http://www.debenhams.com/women/lingerie-nightwear/bras#ps=default&storeId=10001&sfn=Categories&lid=%2F%2Fproductsuniverse%2Fen_GB%2Fproduct_online%3DY%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661%7D%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661_18663%7D%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661_18663_18441%7D%2Fcategories%3C%7Bproductsuniverse_18661_18663_18441_65733_ms%7D&catalogId=10001&sfv=Mastectomy+bras[/URL]
The only time I agree with free surgery such as this if facial reconstruction, or something that will seriously impact them socialy. A breast however, will not have a huge impact on a person, thus should not be payed for by the state. If she wants this done she can pay for it herself, the NHS has better things to be worrying about than her breast. [editline]07:46PM[/editline] [QUOTE=TH89;21101199]The point is more when she GOT the surgery she was TOLD she would be able to get it reconstructed Then afterward they said she couldn't[/QUOTE] It's more likely she was told she MIGHT be able to get reconstruction, which she assumed meant they would. Any way they've just saved her from dying of cancer and shes complaining about her fucking breast, selfish cow.
[QUOTE=TH89;21101199]The point is more when she GOT the surgery she was TOLD she would be able to get it reconstructed Then afterward they said she couldn't[/QUOTE] I didn't notice that part. Yeah, this does change things a little.
Looks like cancer got the [I]breast[/I] of her. [img]http://chrisstubbs.com/AustinPowers.jpg[/img]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.