Leviticus/Addenbrookes

[holdthesky]

An oddly Levitican experience at Addenbrookes.

After enquiring on our indulgence in various vices, the appearance of unusual discharges, times since and between this and that, the nature of entrails, etc, our mediator on earth disappeared to consult a consultant almighty, claimed to be in an adjacent room, and came back with a 'no', validating the decision by praising the almighty, and his omniscient knowledge of fluids and the like. Fortunately, he didn't ask about weaving mixed cloth or work upon the sabbath or we'd have been in real trouble.

It was interesting to hear him claim it was a sacred, purely medical decision but, despite that, that there was no medical reason why we couldn't go private and that they would say yes, suggesting an unusually literal connection between wallets and genitalia.

I'd much rather he'd been honest: that people are put on a list from nice to naughty and a certain amount of money is given and they go down the list from the top, down as far as it will go.

Pretending a (meta-)physical connection to hide a social problem is not an endearing deception, but seemed oddly in keeping with the Old Testament questioning.

Comments

[rmc28]

Of course the private sector will say yes. It's your money they're spending, not some idea of the "taxpayer" or the "nation"'s money.

[holdthesky]

What annoys me is that they weren't direct with us about it. I understand that things have to be rationed because the budget is finite, but that's not how they explained it: they have constantly presented as if it were a medical decision, which is deceptive. We've never had clear guidance as to what the criteria are because at each decision point it's presented as the ineffable medical decision of a trained gynaecologist, rather than a matter of accountancy, and as a result we have wasted years. If something has to be rationed, it should be rationed openly, with clear criteria, to allow people not only make other plans, if they can and want to, but also to prepare for disappointment. We looked up the various NICE and HFEA guidelines and haven't for a moment questioned the need for them or their basis, it was those that we were planning by. But it turns out that even when all the diagnosis is done and conveyed, which I'm sure is an expert and non-algorithmic task, the applications of the diagnosis to the guidelines remains according to the whim of individual consultants.