Letter: Ethical dilemmas that daily confront NHS doctors
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your tongue-in-cheek leading article suggesting that only saints may be eligible for treatment in the 'slimline NHS' (24 May) neatly evades the difficult issues and choices that confront NHS doctors daily in the distribution of health care.
Since demand is unlimited and resources are finite it is constantly necessary to prioritise treatment. Neither the public through its politicians, nor the mass media through self-appointed spokesmen seem willing or able to indicate clear guidelines in specific situations, of which we have had some good recent examples, including fertility treatment, and bypass surgery for those who continue to smoke.
It is easy to be critical of the choices that have been made but it is important to remember that doctors themselves are very much divided on these questions. We should expect as much, since after all, doctors are themselves a cross section of our society, albeit with much greater insight into the problems of the NHS.
For the time being, therefore, doctors remain largely entitled to implement their own views in their own fields. Thus, for example, I regard vasectomy reversal and religious circumcision to have very low priorities in the allocation of taxpayers' money, and believe that most of those seeking these procedures should fund them privately. Others may feel differently. Either way, more positive advice and opinion, particularly from the public, would be most welcome.
Yours faithfully,
D. L. CROSBY
Consultant Surgeon
University Hospital of Wales
Cardiff
26 May
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments