Which is more important, medically speaking – aggressive cancer treatment, or tattoo removal? If you are Great Britain’s National Heath Service, the answer is obvious – the tattoo work.

A former sailor who has had a sex-change is to have her tattoos removed on the NHS because she feels "unladylike", it has been revealed.
NHS bosses who agreed the procedure have been criticised for wasting taxpayers' money, as thousands of nurses and doctors lose their jobs in cuts.

Tanya Bainbridge, 57, who was born Brian, wants the tattoos removed so she can wear sleeveless dresses and tops in summer. The procedure reportedly costs £2,500.

Miss Bainbridge, who has nine children - from whom she is now estranged - by three different women, had a £20,000 sex-change operation on the NHS in 2001 at Charing Cross Hospital in London.

Her local primary health care trust will pay for her to visit the hospital again for laser treatment to remove the tattoos.

Miss Bainbridge lives with her boyfriend, Mark, in Middleton, Greater Manchester. They are both unemployed.

Now a faded blue, the tattoos show a ship and a swallow which includes the names of some of her children. She had them done when she served in the Merchant Navy from 1964 to 1976.

Yes, we must help sexually confused ex-sailors with amputated genitalia get themselves into sun dresses. What could possibly be more important?

Certainly not this lady.

Mother-of-three Claire McDonnell, 33, has been refused "wonder drug" Herceptin by Wokingham Primary Care Trust to treat her aggressive form of breast cancer because of its cost.

Mrs McDonnell, from Reading in Berkshire, said the cost of removing Miss Bainbridge's tattoos, £2,500, was the same amount as the initial treatment of Herceptin. She added: "That money could pay for my breast cancer treatment."

Well, come on, how can this woman be so insensitive? ItÂ’s not like she is going to die and leave her children motherless without that medication.

Oh, wait – she will die without that treatment.

I guess NHS just feels there are some sacrifices that must be made in the name of fashion -- and it doesnÂ’t matter how many lives it costs.

Anyone need more reason to object to nationalizing healtcare in the manner advocated by Senator Clinton?

Posted by: Greg at 12:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.