I have no idea - I sincerely doubt anyones life was at risk, or was receiving reduced treatment due to her being in the country.

 

Question is, why was she here in the first place, I agree with a certain ammount of Legal immigration, its good for the country but things are out of hand, if we let people in we should look after them, if they are here illegally then its our fault for letting them get in and not getting rid of them when caught.

We are a soft touch, I cannot blame someone from somewhere **** like Ghana wanting a better life but this country is only so big and only has so many resources, we cannot "Heal the World", we should do our bit being a rich country but not when it starts diluting care for the people born here who have paid into the system all their lives.

 

I absolutely refuse to beleive this is true - I suspect it is as a result of rumour, speculation and misinformation.

 

She was here legally - She arrived 5 years ago. Her visa ran out last year, by which time she was receiving treatment for damged kindeys die to cancer.

Not being funny, but did you actually read the article before commenting on it?

 

Contradiction surely!

 

I don't see how else you could prioritise things.

The more ill you are, the quicker you get treamtent - I.e. no one is taking your place on the treatment table if you are in desperate need.

 

I mean in the sense she was here legally when she arrived - Which is waht Jaclo was questioning.

 

 

Personally, I'm surprised we haven't shot her in the head and stopped worrying about it. Apparently, that's what we do when people's visas run out.

Bl**dy hard/harsh situation to deal with for all concerned. As previously stated, there aren't enough machines to go around as it is.

From a more logical point of view. It could be argued that WE destroyed her kidneys and she should be returned to her country in the same state as that in which she arrived. I'd also query whether it's normal to suffer catastrophic loss of kidney function whilst being treated for cancer.

J.

 

I kid you not Pete, it is sadly true.

This was about 5 years ago. The Parish council had been appealing against the desision, and only last summer did they get the grant needed.

Village hall has been done up over the past couple months, and is looking superb now.

 

Interesting responses above.

Wonder how different the responses would be if it was a relative and the ghanian and there was only one of them who could have the treatment.

 

I think it's a known problem with mylenoma which is what she has - It can cause renal failure.

 

But that's a nonsensical situation - it will never happen.

But just for the sake of debate, it wouldn't matter if the other person was Ghanain or from Golders Green, you would obviously still want your relative to receive the treatment.

 

if she terminal the its not like they can save her anyway. probably harsh but since i pay my tax's then y should i pay for someone who shouldn't be here?

 

chemo-therapy can cause renal failure too

 

The real issue here isn't imagration or the state of the NHS, it's just plain and simple humanity.

 

Sums it up

 

you can't heal the world

 

Doesn't mean you shouldn't try

 

Sadly the Telegraph article I posted doesn't agree

 

I agree, let's start with the UK and get that sorted, then we can move on to the next country

 

Well it does really. What it says is that people are treated accordsing to need - No one is missing out, its just that people may have to wait a little longer due to extra patients.

In other words, if you are critically ill, you will get treated - your life is not at risk.

And as I said before, how else do you prioritise if not based on need?

 

Olly, it was in the times and never the less a worthwhile read.

 

true, just ashame its not feasable to heal the world, but if you don't make people leave when there poorly, the whole world will try to get in when there sick, and how is that fair on tax payers?

 

No , your just stating what most people think but are sadly afraid to say.

Chip

 

I am surprised that there hasn't been a bleating from human rights groups about how this removal isn't right, and that they have not stepped into prevent this from happening.

From what I understand, she initially came into the country on a visitors visa, she then changed this to a student visa as she wanted to take some course. It seems that due to language barriers she could not complete the course. She had left the UK to visit a relative and then on her return her student visa had expired so she was allowed entry under a visitors visa, which then expired.

At that point she should have left the country, but did not do so. Heartless as this may sound, but if your visa has expired then you either need to renew it or leave the country. As said she has not been deported but removed, the difference being she could try to legally re-enter the UK, something you can't do if you're deported.

Being somewhat unkind here, but did it not occur to her, when thinking about going on a course in the UK that if she had problems with the English language that this would perhaps mean she could not complete the course? One does wonder if she only applied for the course and the student visa to allow her access to additional benefits, notably healthcare, that would not be available to someone on a visitors visa.

I'm also curious to know why she did not, upon being told she had cancer and needed treatment, contact immigration and explain her situation and see what, if anything, can be done in regards to her immigration status. It may well be she knew, or thought, that they would say "tough, we're not going to give you a status that you're not entitled to, please leave when your visa expires". It does say that she has spoken to them but not exactly when.

 

What.. We paid for her flight home?? The cheek of it!

 

You know, if I had cancer, and knew my chances of survival were about a million times better in the UK than in Ghana, guess where I would try and stay.

I do find it quite horrible that people are so heartless as to think that this personal should die in Ghana rather than make an utterly insignificant impact on NHS services.


The *only* reason I sort of see why she had to be deported is because you cannot make individual cases, and you cannot be seen to be a hospital for the world.

At the same time, I do feel that we have a moral obligation to help out where ever we can, when it comes to people that have no hope whatsoever of help in thier own country.

On balance, having thought about it, I would much rather this person stay, and hopefully if not be cured at least enjoy some form of quality of life, than be sent home to die.

It saddens me that people can think any other way about another human being.

 

By providing interim treatment we should accept ongoing responsibility for her, if she was an 8 year old child being denied treatment I'm betting opinions would differ significantly!

 

I suppose if you were waiting for a liver too (I assume you are a British tax paying resident) you wouldn't be ticked off if she received one before you?