Last week the British press was full of the Ghanaian woman who was deported to Ghana in spite of the fact that the authorities knew that she would almost certainly die for lack of life-saving dialysis. The woman had gone to the UK on a study visa and developed multiple myeloma while there. As long as her visa was valid she was treated, but as soon as it expired, and she didn't manage to get a work permit, she was on the list for deportation. Last week, she and two immigration officials boarded a plane for Accra - a city she had only visited once in her life to get her visa and travel to Britain. She was put up for the first two nights in a luxury hotel, along with the immigration officials, who left without apparently even saying goodbye to her. During those two days she ascertained that she could get dialysis in Accra, but at a cost that was the equivalent of more than R30 000 for three weeks treatment. This was totally beyond her means. However, by now sufficient people in Britain were aware of her plight and an anonymous donor from Wales sent her the money to pay for her first three weeks of treatment. What will happen thereafter is anyone's guess. Dialysis is not available free on the state in Ghana, so her outlook is bleak. An editorial in The Lancet decried the lack of public outrage from the British medical community, although about 250 doctors from various different organisations had apparently signed a petition asking that she be allowed to stay in Britain on humanitarian grounds. This is a difficult one. I am sure that there are plenty of you reading this who can understand the response of most of the British community, which is "Why should we pay for this woman's treatment?" You may feel the same about immigrants to this country. And perhaps allowing people to stay in a country purely to receive medical treatment that they cannot obtain in their own country could set a dangerous precedent - particularly as medical care is one of the things that spurs immigration from many poor countries. But what is the humane way to behave? The developed world has responded to its own lack of resources by depleting resources in the rest of the world - to the detriment of those country's populations. And as climate change and resulting political instability become the norm the effects on public and personal health in poorer countries will become increasingly apparent. And the West will continue to require the developing world to feed its unsutainable life style. There is an argument that says that Britain owes a few Ghanaians dialysis - they used the country's resources for long enough after all. Globalisation is not leading to increased understanding and tolerance. In fact the opposite seems to be true as wealthy countries - our own included - try to butress themselves against the hoards at the gates. We live in interesting times.
Bridget Farham, https://www.bizcommunity.com