36. Mr. B. Harrisonasked the Minister of Health why treatment available outside the Service for curing or alleviating blindness in small children is not available through the National Health Service.
§ Mr. TurtonI am aware that a doctor who does not practise in the National Health Service claims to be able to treat some of these children successfully. I have had repeated inquiries made for the evidence on which his claims are based and have been unable to obtain any evidence at all or even, latterly, any reply to inquiries. I regret to say that I am advised by the most distinguished eye surgeons that there is no known effective treatment for the type of blindness in question. The claims made can do nothing but raise false hopes and lead to fruitless expenditure of considerable sums of money.
Mr. HarrisonHow does my right hon. Friend explain the fact that the parents of these children have noticed an improvement in their sight after they have been treated by this doctor?
§ Mr. TurtonThe type of blindness in question is retrolental fibroplasia. I am advised that some of the children have a small remnant of sight left, enough just to perceive light. A very young baby cannot demonstrate that, but as his mental capacity develops he becomes able to appreciate and follow light and to show others that he can do so. This gives the impression that the sight has improved when it may not really have done so. Spontaneous improvement occurs in some cases during the first few weeks of the disease.
§ Mr. HastingsAm I right in concluding that the most distinguished ophthalmic surgeons are engaged in the National Health Service and that better treatment cannot be obtained outside the Service than in it?
§ Mr. TurtonThat is perfectly true. The point here is that these parents are being asked to pay £500 for the treatment when we can find no evidence of any advantage received by the children.