Sir, - Nuala O'Faolain's article about the VHI raised some interesting points.
People join the VHI for differs bent reasons. Some can afford to do so to enjoy the luxury of private clinics without having to worry about the cost. The vast majority join to gain access to treatment they need long before they could have the same treatment in a public hospital. They carry the burden of this extra cost despite the fact that they pay PRSI to the State. Yet they are denied the same benefits from the State that they would qualify for if they had treatment in a public hospital.
I would suggest that this is unconstitutional. Why should someone who pays out of their own pocket to have treatment be disadvantaged by the State for doing so? It is somewhat similar to an insurance company not paying an agreed cost of a claim because the claimant chose to spend more on the repair out of their own pocket.
The gap between what the VHI pay and what the private hospitals charge is putting further demands on the unfortunate subscriber. If all who pay PRSI were entitled, as a right, to benefit irrespective of where they choose to have treatment, this would help to make up the shortfall. - Yours, etc.,
Hazelbrook Road,
Terenure,
Dublin 6W.