Failed asylum seekers and illegal immigrants should be provided with free anti-HIV treatment, the House of Commons Health Select Committee has recommended in a new report.
Government plans to curb “health tourism” involve denying anti-HIV treatment to failed asylum seekers, illegal immigrants and individuals who have overstayed their visa could have a serious impact on public health and the fight against HIV, the cross party committee of MPs warn. Earlier this month the All Party Parliamentary Group on AIDS issued a report written by four leading UK HIV doctors which said that the denial of HIV treatment to failed asylum seekers could not be justified on moral, economic or public health grounds.
The Health Committee concluded that if free HIV treatment is not available, people at risk of HIV will remain undiagnosed. Anti-HIV treatment can significantly reduce the infectiousness of HIV-positive individuals, reducing the risk of onward transmission of the virus.
“It’s vital that the UK does not become a magnet for HIV-positive individuals seeking to emigrate to this country to access our health care” said committee chairman, Labour MP David Hinchcliffe, however he added “we have seen no evidence that this happening…evidence actually suggests that HIV-positive migrants do not access NHS services until their disease is very advanced, sometimes years after arrival in the UK.”
Mr Hinchcliffe also highlighted the public health implications of withholding treatment “the Health Protection Agency, the Government’s own public health advisory body, told us that if these individuals are not treated, and they remain sexually active in this country, then transmission is ‘bound to go up’”.
Sexually transmitted infections
Concern is also expressed by the Health Select Committee about the continued increase in the incidence of sexually transmitted infections and the ability of sexual health clinics to cope with the number of individuals requiring treatment. The report notes that only 38% of individuals are seen within the Government’s target of 48 hours and that 25% of patients often have to wait two weeks for an appointment.
Mr Hincliffe welcomed the Government’s extra investment in sexual health but cautioned that it was important to ensure that the money reached frontline sexual health services.
Because of concerns about the ability of services to cope with the demands being placed on them, the MPs are recommending that the Government’s proposed national sexual health education campaign should be postponed until sexual health clinics are able to cope with the anticipated increase in demand.
Concern was also expressed by MPs about the quality of sex education in schools. “Educating young people about relationships and sexual health is one of the most powerful tools we have to promote better sexual health”, said Mr Hinchcliffe. He added “young people are still being taught about sex and relationships by teachers who lack both competence and confidence in this area”. By 2007 the Health Select Committee wants sex and relationship education to be compulsory and conducted by specialist teachers rather than form tutors.