Views differ on IVF policy in York

Patrick Crowley, Chief Executive of York Hospital

Patrick Crowley, Chief Executive of York Hospital

First published in Letters

I WISH to clarify comments made by readers in recent letters to The Press (“NHS should be fair and open to all”, August 15 , and “Couples need aid”, August 13).

Decisions regarding which NHS services are provided locally are made by the commissioners, and for York this is the Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group. It is they who pay for local health services, and it is they who have to make the decision whether or not a service (for example IVF) is provided on the NHS for people in York.

It is not the decision of the hospital trust, as some readers have suggested. The hospital trust can only provide the services that it is paid to provide.

Patrick Crowley, Chief Executive, York Hospital, Wigginton Road, York.

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:17pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Unfortunately this is a symptom (no pun intended) of the pseudo privatisation of the NHS which has been going on for some years. The original idea was that it should be free at the point of use to everybody and it should be NATIONAL. All hospitals should offer identical services and these should not be decided by mysterious "groups". In my opinion.
Unfortunately this is a symptom (no pun intended) of the pseudo privatisation of the NHS which has been going on for some years. The original idea was that it should be free at the point of use to everybody and it should be NATIONAL. All hospitals should offer identical services and these should not be decided by mysterious "groups". In my opinion. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 3

6:08pm Tue 19 Aug 14

roadwars says...

" It is they who pay for local health services, and it is they who have to make the decision whether or not a service (for example IVF) is provided on the NHS for people in York."

It's us who pay for local health services and as we all pay the same rate wherever we live, we should all get the same service regardless of whether you think it should include IVF or not.
" It is they who pay for local health services, and it is they who have to make the decision whether or not a service (for example IVF) is provided on the NHS for people in York." It's us who pay for local health services and as we all pay the same rate wherever we live, we should all get the same service regardless of whether you think it should include IVF or not. roadwars
  • Score: 8

12:08pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Older Sometimes Wiser says...

As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved.
It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving.
The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function.
Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias.
Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.
As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do. Older Sometimes Wiser
  • Score: 0

2:14pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Older Sometimes Wiser wrote:
As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved.
It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving.
The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function.
Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias.
Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.
"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved."
I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?
[quote][p][bold]Older Sometimes Wiser[/bold] wrote: As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.[/p][/quote]"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved." I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions? Pinza-C55
  • Score: 0

6:40pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Older Sometimes Wiser says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
Older Sometimes Wiser wrote:
As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved.
It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving.
The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function.
Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias.
Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.
"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved."
I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?
I will let Dr Mark Hayes respond should he wish to ,but essentially each member of the Board were asked for their views and a vote was taken. Differing views were expressed and a vote taken, which was close.
There were a number of members of the public present, as the meetings are open with provision for initial questions.
Again I suggest you attend in future.
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Older Sometimes Wiser[/bold] wrote: As a member of the public I attended the Clinical Commissioning Group Board Meeting which made the very difficult decision not finance the I.V.F procedure at present.This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved. It was quite an emotional discussion, as I feel everyone had sympathies with women who have difficulties in conceiving. The CCG in contrast to the previous Primary Care Trust is very open and willing to listen and respond to both patients and public, but they have a difficult job in balancing an expanding need against reducing funds. Someone must prioritize and that is their function. Is a pity that the Press were NOT present due to holidays, as otherwise there might have been a more balanced report. Subsequent reports attempting to "muddy the water" with Party politics are totally irrelevant as Dr Mark Hayes was careful to avoid any possible accusations of bias. Those who want to be better informed should attend these meetings as I do.[/p][/quote]"This was made democratically after detailed discussion of all the facts and financial problems involved." I which context are you using the word "democratically" ? The conventional meaning is a vote from the electorate. How can the public affect the decisions taken by the group and how are the group members chosen? What factors are allowed in the group's decisions?[/p][/quote]I will let Dr Mark Hayes respond should he wish to ,but essentially each member of the Board were asked for their views and a vote was taken. Differing views were expressed and a vote taken, which was close. There were a number of members of the public present, as the meetings are open with provision for initial questions. Again I suggest you attend in future. Older Sometimes Wiser
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree