It’s interesting that the meaning of Asylum as a place of safety is often lost amid political footballing of the term, backwards and forwards.
I was trying to read through some work-related articles to get some more information for my current work-in-progress which is an ‘as dull as it sounds’ project to link local services in the area in which I work to the National Service Framework for Mental Health (don’t worrry too much about the link – I’m practising and the content is enormously dull!).
Anyway, through my web travels, I alighted on this article on the Daily Mail website which to sum up, rants and raves about how awful it is that failed asylum-seekers should be able to claim free NHS care.
A couple of thoughts jumped immediately to my mind
- How can healthcare not be considered a basic human right?
- How can people think that it is justified to deny people, regardless of when, where or how they arrived in the UK, basic healthcare?
- What would the architects of the National Health Service make of the prosperous middle classes who object to their tax being spent on those less fortunate of any nationality.
One of the things that surprised me more than anything was that everyone seemed to agree with the article that it clearly misuse of ‘our’ money to fund healthcare for all.
Having met and worked with some failed asylum seekers they probably fall into the category of the least fortunate of all. They have invariably gone through a significant amount of pain and loss to arrive in a foreign country – and then have their appeals to stay turned down. Not everyone is on-the-make and a little bit of charity and charitable thought doesn’t ever hurt.
Thatcher did very well to extinguish the idea of community.