A YOUNG woman said to be suffering for five years from severe anorexia nervosa and depression has taken a High Court challenge to the HSE's refusal to fund a recommended programme of specialised in-patient treatment for her in a recognised private clinic in England.
The 22-year-old woman's family remortgaged their home last year to pay the €100,000 cost to date of the treatment at the Newmarket House Clinic in Norwich and to raise money for future treatment after being told it was feared their daughter would suffer organ failure if she did not receive appropriate treatment.
This financial burden was causing stress and hardship to the woman and her family, the court was told.
A consultant psychiatrist who had treated the woman for some time without success recommended the treatment in summer 2007 after other forms of treatment had failed, it was also stated. The woman had spent a considerable period in a psychiatric hospital here but was released in June 2007 with little improvement in her condition.
In July and August 2007, the woman was admitted on three occasions to the A&E department of her local hospital. After the woman's family sought funding from the HSE for treatment at the English clinic, the woman was examined by a doctor for the HSE who concluded she was not suffering from anorexia and could be treated as an out-patient.
The woman's father said in an affidavit the doctor had made no enquiries of the psychiatrist before reaching that view.
Mr Justice Michael Peart yesterday granted leave to James O'Mahony SC, for the woman, to bring judicial review proceedings challenging the HSE's refusal of funding.
Counsel said the HSE had refused the treatment, initially in a phone call of August 10th, 2007, and by letter on September 18th, 2007. However, the woman attended at the clinic to begin treatment on August 14th after her family raised funds.
In his affidavit, the woman's father said the refusal of funding was causing considerable distress to the family. They had raised funds for the treatment via a loan from his daughter's aunt and by remortgaging their home. He had also informed the HSE of all the developments in relation to the treatment of his daughter.
He said that, when applying for the funding, he was not told that a number of preconditions had to be met. In any event, the condition of his daughter met all the preconditions, including that the treatment was not available here and there was a reasonable prognosis.
Funding for the same treatment in the same clinic had been provided by the HSE to other persons with eating disorders, he added.
In the proceedings, the woman is challenging the manner in which the application for funding was refused and it is also pleaded that any delay in bringing the action was due to delays in getting medical records. She also wants an order requiring the HSE to reconsider the funding application in accordance with directions of the court.