3. 3. Statement: The Individual Patient Funding Request Review

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 2:41 pm on 21 March 2017.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Vaughan Gething Vaughan Gething Labour 2:41, 21 March 2017

I thank the Member for the questions. Of course, there was agreement between Plaid Cymru and Welsh Labour in coming to an agreement on the compact to take forward a review in this area. And we’ve then expanded it to make sure that other parties have been engaged in the conversation in advance of that, and it has been, I think, a sensible and constructive process.

In terms of the two particular areas of questioning about the clinicians’ awareness of change and how they can help patients through it, that was one of the challenges that we recognise exists already—that some clinicians are better at explaining what the process is and how to help their patients through that. Equally, there were some comments about making sure that the process isn’t used simply instead of explaining to an individual patient in front of you, as a clinician, that there isn’t a reasonable treatment option that exists. And so there’s something here about that honesty in the conversation, which is not easy, but as we recognise, any individual patient funding request in itself isn’t easy. So, there are real human sensitivities around this.

Part of the point about the awareness is that there’s the national debate that we’re having, and lots of clinicians are very definitely interested in the discussion and in the review itself and in today’s statement. But I’ve made clear that the criteria to support decision making should be in place in guidance by May. That should certainly be part of ensuring that, in the run up to that and then subsequently, clinicians are properly aware of the change in the guidance about the decision-making criteria, and then all of the associated recommendations should be in place by September. But you can’t get away from the fact that clinicians will still have to go through what is a difficult process. It isn’t about the technical expertise in deciding what is an appropriate treatment option, but it’s the human interaction with their patient and how they guide that person and explain what they can do and make clear that the process will still require the clinician to support the case to be made for an IPFR. So, I’m sure that you, myself and other Members will still have contact from individuals in our constituencies about these particular choices and decisions.