The National Health Service is apparently enforcing a new policy. If you pay for part or your treatment/medication yourself through private care...........you have to pay for ALL of it. No more free NHS care for those using private and NHS care together. It may behoove some of you to be cautious about what you say to NHS providers regarding HRT supplies and planned/completed surgery through private UK and foreign surgeons. I do not know the specifics, but this article sounds ominous.

http://www.nytimes.com/20[...]=EXCITE

thats awful wendy. you would have though that if patients did bits and pieces privately that it would be a great relief to the NHS. and whoever said if you pay a little private you no longer get support from the NHS is quite sick! just to reiterate their meaning... to get treatment you have to go 100% nhs and by the time you receive treatment on the nhs the cancer is so advanced you will die of it but if you speed things up by going private, the NHS wont support you anymore and you wont be able to afford final treatment and will die of cancer anyway. quite sick! if ya ask me! these people need to go to someone’s bedside, look at them dying of cancer and say, "sorry, we cant treat you because you had a private consultation"

The rationalization is that everyone should have the same substandard level of care. Moderately rich and poor alike. It would be unfair to those with less money if people with a bit more can afford to survive their illness. The rich, of course, can afford total private care. I'm willing to bet that neither the Queen or Prime Minister use NHS.

Since the PCT refused to pay for my SRS I had a word with my GP on this topic. It is his view that if I fund the SRS myself the NHS will continue funding my Hormonal and psychiatric treatment. However this is where the NHS refuse to fund an op not a drugs regime that lots of people require to remain alive.

Actually this is not a new thing at all but due to advances in medicine it falls in to the 'Cuckoo Land scenario' of : is it worth spending a lot of money to treat someone who is terminally ill in order to give them a few more weeks or months of life?
So do we? Or do we say, sorry..but spending £5/10/20K on drugs for the little extra time is not cost effective.
But then aborting healthy foetusses while sending £1000s in IVf is not either...why not just pay pregnant women to have the baby then give it to whoever wants one?
And just how many 'vegetables' are lingering in hospitals and nursing homes at this very moment? Do we wnat to introduce euthenasia or do we keep on spending?

But what is important is that the NHS basic rule is that all illnesses will be treated whatever the cost but life will not be prolonged regardless of cost.
Thats where emotion gets in the way of economics and makes for lurid headlines.

(This doens't apply to 'pervs/freaks/queers' who think they are in the wrong body... We have to thank the decades of transphobic media that has poisoned the minds of most 84% of NHS management and medics against GRS.)
Interestingly I or anyone else can have many £1000s work on our illnesses on just our doctors and specialists say-so but anything TG/GRS has to go to the local Special Funding Panel who are all probly among the 84% anti-GRS.