This site is intended for health professionals only
Tuesday 22 May 2012
Facebook Twiter Linkedin

GPs forced to register illegal immigrants after threat of legal action

By Craig Kenny | 22 Dec 2011

Exclusive GPs are being forced to register and treat known illegal immigrants because of the threat of legal action, a Pulse investigation reveals.

A GP practice in Essex has told how it was made to re-register a family of migrants without permission to stay in the UK after pressure from human rights lawyers, even though the local hospital refuses to accept referrals for them – and the solicitor involved has claimed similar success in ‘scores' of other cases, including where people have come to the UK illegally.

The case, at a practice which asked not to be identified, highlights mounting confusion over the responsibilities of GPs in treating migrants who do not have leave to remain in the UK, or have been refused asylum status. While Department of Health guidance permits GPs to treat failed asylum seekers at their discretion, a Pulse investigation in July found one in ten primary care organisations place practices that do so under investigation.

Last year, a family from Nigeria registered with the Essex practice, with each patient providing an NHS number. But when the practice attempted to make a referral to the local hospital, the hospital wrote back saying they were not here legally and were not entitled to treatment.

The practice subsequently checked this with the UK Border Agency, which confirmed the family's application for asylum had been refused with no right of appeal in May 2010, and then again in August 2010. After the family confirmed this, the practice removed the two adults, but not the children, from its list.

GPs at the practice then received a letter from Pierce Glynn, a firm of human rights lawyers in Bristol, which challenged the decision under the 2004 GMS contract regulations and the Equality Act 2010, and threatened judicial review.  Similar challenges were made to the PCT, for not assigning the family to another practice, and the local hospital, for refusing to treat the family and for disclosing their immigration status to the GP.

The practice manager told Pulse: ‘Someone at the PCT read the letter and panicked. I started getting lots of phone calls from the PCT saying we should not remove them, and if we don't take them back then they could take contractual action.'

‘I looked everywhere to find anything written about what GPs should do with illegal immigrants, but there is nothing.'

After taking advice from its medical defence organisation, the practice re-registered the family.

‘The woman is unwell and needs treatment at the hospital, which is refusing to treat her,' the practice manager said. ‘Where can we refer her if she has no money for private treatment?'

‘And what do I do now about people who come in on six-month or visitors' visas and stay on illegally?  Do we just register everyone who is illegal?'

Adam Hundt, a partner at Pierce Glynn, told Pulse: ‘There's a perception about regulations in relation to primary care, and that baffles me.'

'In fact, there are no rules that are immigration specific here are no eligibility criteria for GP registration. If there is no law that says it's OK [to refuse registration], then it's not OK, and is a breach of GMS or PMS regulations.'

‘I have handled scores of cases involving GP registration and none have ever gone to court. A letter is enough.'

A spokesperson for the Migrants Health Network said: ‘The GMS/PMS regulations do allow GPs to refuse to register someone on reasonable grounds, e.g. the patient is not living in the GPs catchment area, or their list is closed. However, they must not discriminate by refusing to register on grounds of health status, race, gender, sexual orientation or social class.'

According to the Department of Health, immigration status is not considered reasonable grounds to refuse to register someone as an NHS patient in primary care. However Section 175 of the NHS Act 2006 allows hospitals to charge non-UK residents for some secondary care procedures. In 2010 the legislation was amended to allow immediately necessary or urgent treatment to be provided in advance of payment for failed asylum seekers.

GPC negotiator Dr Chaand Nagpaul said: ‘GP practices should not be policing the eligibility of patients for NHS treatment, or whether  they are failed asylum seekers.'

‘The regulations allow GPs discretion to register accordingly. They can register a patient as a temporary resident or an immediately necessary registration, in which case you can restrict services to emergency treatment.'

‘In this case it was a normal registration. If you remove a patient after you register them normally there's guidance on the reasons you can remove someone, and GPs have to give a good reason for removal.'

However, Dr Nagpaul would not comment on whether immigration status could ever be a valid ground for removal.

READERS' COMMENTS

Anonymous, GP Partner,
22 Dec 2011
This amazes me! So now ANYBODY can INSIST on being treated by National Health Service, WHETHER THEY ARE UK CITIZENS OR NOT!
Is it any wonder the NHS is costing TAXPAYERS of this country billions of pounds each year? Try getting any other country to do this. We are the soft mark of the world. If anybody,. anywhere needs medical treatment, then just appear at any GP surgery in UK, and that GP will now be required, by law, to look after that person, whether UK resident/citizen or not! I despair of this place!
Average (6Votes)
Top
Anonymous, Practice Manager,
22 Dec 2011
It is a buck that the immigration authorities/border agencies have thrown at the GPs and practices. In one case I received a letter from the Immigration office that such and such patient is under restriction visa entry, saying "no access to public funds", and according to her meaning that he is not entitled to NHS services, and that he is under detention. we were expected to remove the name on these grounds and we removed. few months later the same patient came with his medical card and requested to be re registered, I called the immigration office, they said that he is no longer under detention, so what should we do, I asked, responded, do what is appropriate.
Why cant the home office/immigration/visa office in overseas consulates put a stamp like other stamps such as 'no access to public funds' can also put a stamp, saying 'no access to NHS' or make it a requirement for all visas issued in future, to submit a private insurance cover for set duration for all new entrants.

Practice Manager
Average (2Votes)
Top
Paul Williams, Salaried GP,
22 Dec 2011
This is a disgraceful piece of journalism. People whose asylum claims have been rejected are not 'illegal immigrants'. There are thousands of people in the UK who do not qualify for refugee status, but who cannot be returned to their country of origin. Many of these have the most serious health problems. I had a letter published in the Lancet detailing some of their health problems more than five years ago www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)66576-2/fulltext. We have a responsibility to treat these people with dignity and to provide them with access to health care.
Average (8Votes)
Top
Colin Lees, GP Partner,
22 Dec 2011
Could Paul Williams like to try going to another country, pleading that he wasn't well, and try to get free health care? Good luck to him. Ask any British tourist who takes ill on holiday and doesn't have Travel Health Insurance how much they have to pay for health care. I am not in the least impressed by 'bleeding heart' statements like his article. The Health Service of this country is for British people and the sooner that is enforced the better. The country can't afford to treat its own people - limited list prescriptions, patients discharged early to save money, etc etc. WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TREAT THE WORLD'S REJECTS. Health Tourists should be weeded out, and either sent back to where they came from - at their own expense - or be treated and charged the going rate for their care.
Average (8Votes)
Top
Anonymous, GP Partner,
22 Dec 2011
Surely this is yet another example of our country's unbelievable stupidity. Asylum seekers leave their own country, for whatever reason, and flock to Britain where they seem to be welcomed with open arms, and are introduced to the DSS, the Health Service, are given clothing, furnished housing, all the allowances that are going, free Health Care for themselves and any relatives they might bring along with them while our own people are left on the streets! How do they appear at the GP's surgery with a National Insurance Number? Do they get this at their port of departure from their own country, or on arrival here? Who tells them about all the free benefits they will receive, as a right, here? Why do they bypass other countries? Could it be because we are the only ones soft enough to give them refuge? This nonsense must cease! I didn't support the British National Party, but might change if this continues and doctors come out saying such nonsense as 'we have a responsibility to treat these people...and give them access to health care'. Do that only after we have fully dealt with the illnesses in our own country!
Average (4Votes)
Top
Ian Holliday, Other healthcare professional,
22 Dec 2011
Ok, I am not a GP, but I have had a lot to do with so called "illegal immigrants" through my trusteeship of a homeless charity. The situation of some of these people is not so "open and shut" as some seem to think. Yes, there are clearly folk who have carefully planned their immigration into this country and intend to play the system for all they can. But reactionary black and white responses are not the answer and I cannot see for the life of me that anybody pointing that out, as Paul Williams has done, can be labelled a bleeding heart - unless the pointing finger has fallen indiscriminately for the Daily Mail, UKIP, BNF or other party propaganda.
Average (7Votes)
Top
Claire Smith, Other healthcare professional,
22 Dec 2011
It might interest the people writing here to read the UKBAs own evidence which acknowledges that the vast majority of people seeking asylum here in the UK have little or no knowledge of benefits and health care entitlments, and choose the country because of their notion of us a fair minded nation, with a good human rights record. What a disapointment to be met by bigotry and selfishness. Perhaps it is time some of you took a look at your codes of conduct and see if your doing justice to your professional ethics.
Average (6Votes)
Top
Monique Keersmaekers, GP Partner,
22 Dec 2011
What happened with our oath when we qualified as doctors? All but forgotten, isn't it? People all over world should have an entitlement to good health care, and if you want to compare the UK with other countries, you should be proud that we do offer this. Apart from this, most people seak asylum in their neighbouring countries, that are mostly struggling themselves and are not able to care for their own people, let alone from other countries.
The UK is a rich country and with more effective management, should be able to care for us all.
By the way, if the NHS is only for British people, I shouldn't be able to have had the poor care I just had, as I'm a Dutch GP practising in the UK!
Average (8Votes)
Top
Anonymous, GP Partner,
22 Dec 2011
Primary care is not funded to provide health care for citizens of the US, Canada, Australia etc
If it is advocated that overseas visitors from around the world should have free primary health care whilst in the UK, then it should be argued that a separately funded service should be developed - but I still would prefer to have my original pension back than fund that.
Average (2Votes)
Top
Anonymous, GP Partner,
22 Dec 2011
Dr Nagpaul is not our boss and should not be harrasing us with his personal political agenda. Why doesn't he donate his personal salary to help fund these people's needs rather than instruct others to pay?
The only group in society that seemingly have no rights are GPs-I find that I am regularly bullied by aggressive patients. Thuggery seems to rule and we have to walk on egg-shells more often than not. Let's start debating doctor's rights.
Average (3Votes)
Top
Anonymous, Sessional/Locum GP,
23 Dec 2011
"A decent provision for the poor is the true test of civilization."
Samuel Johnson
Average (4Votes)
Top
Anonymous, GP Partner,
23 Dec 2011
On the one hand we are told that we need to check the eligibility of potential patients before registering them - and now we are told that regardless of whether or not they are eligible for routine (as opposed to emergency) care on the NHS we are obliged to register and treat them: could TPTB make their minds up?
Think of this scenario:-
Patient registered but not eligible: when this is discovered, is the practice funded for care of that patient?
This may be a serious problem for practices - and PCTs/CCGs - with a high immigrant population - and if CCG budgets are to be based on registered population and not actual population, the effects on the truly eligble population could be disastrous.

There is another consideration - quite apart from the ethics: public health.
There is a higher incidence of diseases such as TB in populations likely to be over-represented in the "illegal immigrant" group.
If this group is deprived of all medical care, how will the risks to the non-"illegal immigrant" population be managed?
I can foresee a situation where the GP (obliged to register a patient known to be not eligible for NHS care) is aware that the patient probably has open TB - but cannot confirm it or access the appropriate chest and public health services.

Shouldn't the situation be sorted at the official level rather than the Good lawyer/bad GP slanging match one?
Average (4Votes)
Top
Anonymous, GP Partner,
23 Dec 2011
Make a charity for home less. give them houses in less.
so that they can save their money, and take drugs with honey.
Immigrants need extra care, removing gall stones, and dental care.
to remove the tatoos of bomblasts, and post-traumatic stress syndromes, that will ever lasts.
write them letters to get proper visa, then they will get marry to john and lisa.
human rights, only apply to slight. and sometime to non-white, but never to doctors who save lives.
Me and my next door illegal friend, we share all British trend, I always walk with flexed neck, and he never bend.
We came to this country same time. He flourished like a weed, on lime, and living happily ,and enjoys everyday's sunshine.
On other side, me and my life. trying to keep everybody happy from PM to wife. always feel, if my neck is under the knife.
Average (2Votes)
Top
Tom Yates, Junior doctor,
03 Jan 2012
If anyone has any evidence of significant levels of health tourism to
the UK, I'd be interested to see it. I find it hard to understand why
a 'health tourist' would wait til their asylum claim had been refused
before attempting to access healthcare. Many European countries (e.g.
Spain) operate a much more liberal access policy than we do - see
http://picum.org/picum.org/uploads/file_/Access_to_Health_Care_for_Undocumented_Migrants.pdf.

The only serious research on the demands 'overseas visitors' place on
NHS primary care was conducted by Sally Hargreaves in Newham when the
Labour government were considering charging refused asylum seekers for
NHS primary care. She concluded, 'In light of the broad scope of the
organisational and procedural changes required for the effective
implementation of the primary care proposals in Newham, and the
limited financial burden that Overseas Visitors appear to be are
having on primary medical services in the Borough, we conclude that
the current proposals to streamline charging procedures at primary
medical services with those in place at hospitals should be
reconsidered.' (http://www.lho.org.uk/Download/Public/11948/1/IHU%20Entitlement%20Report%2006.pdf)

I think this article highlights the ongoing problems with charging
these groups for NHS secondary care. We know that, as a result of
these regulations, people have come to harm including people entitled
to care but unaware of or unable to assert their rights (see
http://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/policy/position/2006/healthcare).
Whilst many communicable diseases are exempt from charging on public
health grounds, it is hard to see how many of these conditions would
be diagnosed if patients cannot access secondary care for the
investigation of non specific symptoms.

There are good guidelines on these issues for GPs - for example,
http://www.bma.org.uk/ethics/asylum_seekers/accessasylumseekers.jsp
and http://rcgp-innovait.oxfordjournals.org/content/3/11/686.abstract.

Its a shame lawyers were required in this case. I like to think that
in most cases humanity and common sense would prevail.
Average (4Votes)
Top
Anonymous, Practice Manager,
04 Jan 2012
We need clearer guidelines from the government on "health tourism". The British tax payer should not have to support this. However, genuine immigrants to this country who contribute to society should be welcomed and treated equally. As a Practice Manager I can confirm a marked increase in registrations of patients from a variety of countries, some of whom once registered seem to disappear.
Average (1Vote)
Top
Anonymous, Sessional/Locum GP,
06 Jan 2012
Why should an illegal immigrant get free treatment when I was unable to get back surgery on the NHS?.
Where was the human rights lawyer for me?
Average (1Vote)
Top
Adam Sandell, Sessional/Locum GP,
08 Jan 2012
Overseas visitors include some of the most vulnerable and marginalised people living in the UK. Denying these people secondary care is often barbaric. It's essential that GPs are able to offer them primary care, and of course it's right that no-one should be refused care, or removed from a list, on discriminatory grounds.

Debates about costs to the NHS, and about health tourism, are primarily national policy issues. They have little role to play in decisions made by individual GPs, receptionists and practice managers about how best to ensure that everyone in their local communities has access to good primary care.

It is unfortunate that the rules aren't straightforward, and that the rules in hospitals are different from those in general practice. The simple rule, though, is to try to do your best for everyone seeking primary care, in as non-discriminatory a fashion as possible. It's hard to imagine that any decent health professional would want to do anything else.

It is a little hard to read angry comments about "not being able to afford to treat the world's rejects" as not being tainted by xenophobia and bigotry. It may, in fact, save money to provide access to basic primary care services to traumatised people who have somehow managed to flee from brutal persecution and who have initially been wrongly refused refugee status by the UK Border Agency, rather than having to pick up the pieces when their mental health deteriorates to the point that they require expensive specialist treatment and either hospitalisation or costly community care services. But I prefer the moral arguments for being decent.
Average (1Vote)
Top
Peter Morrison, Other healthcare professional,
09 Feb 2012
I am amazed by those of you who make your comments under anonymous identity. - Why anonymous? Could it be that, you fully recognise it is unprofessional to pour such extreme political vitriol onto those you are supposed to be caring for?
Colin Lees at least has the courage (or is it arrogance) to put his name to his wholly unsavoury and blatanly facsist views: his characterisation of those 'sans papiers' as "THE WORLD'S REJECTS" is repulsive. - His comparison of his own priviledged middle class international holiday scenario with the plight of e.g. stateless people in utter desperation with no options - is sickening. - If in Ardrie, I'll keep well clear!! - I suggest you read some Burns man - it might introduce you the meaning of humility and offer you a glimpse of what compassion means - try "Address To The Unco Good" for starters. Alternatively, if that's really not to your taste, you'd make an excellent candidate for the BNP.
Paul, Ian, Claire and Monique - thank goodness for the balance and realism you bring to the discussion.
That we have people in this country whose civil status is irregular is simply a fact we need to get used to. Many of them have no option and have nowhere else to go. Sure, some may have options and be dishonest about their reasons for being here. - But that is a matter for the State to deal with and so long as the State does not deport these people it is moraly incumbent upon, and apparently lawfully required of, the State to provide basic healthcare.
It is certainly NOT the place of MDs to be arguing in public over the rights or wrongs of immigration policy or the politics of how the world's unfortunates should be dealt with once we let them into the country. There are issues of inconsistency within the health service - and short term problems in budgets etc. - but the cry from MDs should be toward the bureaucrats and government to maker the resources available.
Average (0Votes)
Top
Philip Peverley, GP Partner,
06 Mar 2012
Nigeria is one of 36 countries that receive aid from the UK.

The sensible thing to do here is provide health care, then calculate the cost of health care received by those Nigerian nationals not entitled to it, and deduct the total from the money donated to Nigeria by UK taxpayers.
Average (0Votes)
Top

ADD YOUR COMMENTS

Please note You must be a registered user of PulseToday and logged in to add comments. Opinions expressed below are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of PulseToday. Comments are considered in the public domain and may be used in future Pulse coverage. We accept no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for the accuracy or the content of member comments.

Comment*

You must be logged in to add a comment.Clickhere to login.

POLL

Are GPs ordering too many lab tests?Read the full story here

SIGN UP FOR EMAIL NEWSLETTERS

Keep up-to-date with the latest changes to the NHS, CPD and clinical guidelines. Sign up below or find out more.