The decision this week to allow NHS patients in England to top up their NHS care by paying for additional drugs, provided private treatments take place in private medical facilities, is a monumental one with far-reaching implications. Coming after about four months of consultation, the policy will automatically put an end to the old regime in which resorting to a private facility or drugs outside those authorised by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) would result in one giving up access to NHS care.

Relying heavily on the need to improve access to medicines for NHS patients, Health Secretary Alan Johnson and National Cancer Director Professor Michael Richards made the new decision public.

In the period under which it was debated, various positions were advanced by experts of varying professional backgrounds, including medical practitioners who made clear their position that allowing the policy could weaken the health system rather than serve as a boost. And there were many others who felt it was high time NHS patients were allowed to supplement their care with private fee-paying treatments. In this case too, the need to strengthen the NHS was clearly articulated.

What are the likely implications of NHS top-ups?
One of the very first things that analyst have been clear about is that allowing NHS top-ups could result in many patients, especially those who can conveniently afford it, turn to private medical or health insurance at the expense of the NHS.

Let's not forget that some months ago, when the superbug issue dominated discourses everywhere in the country, many people wanted to opt for what they termed cleaner, superbug-free private medical facilities. Often, people in support of this position argued that the private healthcare attracts fewer people of less diverse backgrounds and are, therefore cleaner. The fact that it could mean paying a lot of money as opposed to the almost entirely free of charge services obtained from the NHS mattered, and still matters, less to these people.

But in fairness to many in this category the decision would allow a wider access to treatments, especially for people suffering such very serious illnesses as cancer. While unveiling it, Mr Johnson noted that: "It is an incredibly thorough report and I am accepting all of his recommendations." The health secretary went on to explain that the policy would lead to "greater clarity, a fairer society and wider access to treatment."

For many that worked round the clock to ensure its approval this is a sweet victory that comes with many advantages. And for those, like insurance companies, who did not make any obvious push towards it but silently prayed for it to see the light of the day, it's a dream come true.

This, perhaps, explains why some pundits were opposed to it from the consultation period up until now. Experts on this side of the argument still believe that the health system would be hugely undermined and the big insurance firms would be the winners.

Whether this will happen or not, the most important thing at the moment, especially for consumers, is to make the most of its advantages and avoid those flaws that would get them into trouble. Often, as in the case of most insurance policies, the essential thing to do is to try shopping and comparing deals as much as possible. With online comparison sites at our disposal all the time, we have no excuse not to find the deals that suit our needs most.



Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Musa_Aliyu