Do you agree with what the European Court of Human Rights has decided?

Question

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7421045.stm

Answer 1

No.

Answer 2

For a change, yes.

We have enough health service spongers over here as it is.

Answer 3

yes, and you should read the other link on health tourists too. I am fed up with soft touch Britain. People in this country who have paid NI all their working life are being refused 'expensive' cancer drugs.

Answer 4

I think so. She can get the same treatment and drugs in Uganda. And her claims of abuse haven't been proved so I don't see any reason why she shouldn't be returned. She's already been here a long time given that here asylum claim was unsuccessful in 2001!!

Answer 5

I confess that i am on the fence on this one, especially how many wealthy people from outside the EU get free treatment.

I heard that from a doctor by the way, and don't doubt it considering the times i have spent in UK hospitals, and listened to some who have openly said so. I don't know, but i know a little girl who lived in our borough who was dying and she wasn't some freeloader,  but was sent back to her country and knew that she couldn't get any kind of treatment for her cancer and died shortly afterwards, her life wasn't going to be prolonged just they should have let her die here with a little dignity.  I am sorry perhaps none of this makes any sense.

Answer 6

Yes I do. She entered the country under an assumed name thereby breaking the law. When she entered the country she already had the illness. Is there any proof of how she caught this illness? It doesn't appear so. Whilst I would never deliberately not help an ill person I think there has to be a line drawn somewhere for illegal immigrants, especially those who enter the country under false pretences and later apply for asylum.

Answer 7

Well she came here 10 years ago under an assumed name, so she wasn't 100% honest ~ and she has had 10 good years of NHS treatment, so she has done OK from this country.

She has had a good deal up until now ~ she should accept the outcome and return to Uganda, thankful for what she DID get.

Answer 8

Yes.  If this receiving medical treatment on the NHS is the only point in this woman's favour, then clearly she was a bogus asylum seeker in the first place, as benefiting from our health service is not a bona fide reason for claiming asylum. Perhaps it occurred to the judges who are so fond of telling us what to do in our own country that their countries too would be rendered vulnerable if it became enshrined in the jurisprudence of the ECHR that anybody entering a member state who argued that medical care in his or her own country was in any way inferior to that available in the host country could establish the right to remain.  Inhuman and degrading treatment has a positive meaning. This woman was arguing from a negative angle -- namely not having everything she wanted served up on a plate. That does not constitute inhuman and degrading treatment.