High levels of access to free and confidential sexual health services are vital for the health and well-being of thousands of students annually. The current sexual health services work to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancies through provision of testing and treatment of STIs, free contraception, and information on safe sex procedures.
Defunding this service puts thousands of students at risk, and increases the chance of more untreated cases of STIs and their spread. This is especially true for University students, which are a high risk group. Its for these reasons that we ask Nottingham City Council to continue funding of the sexual health services.
Started by: Allan Carmen
On reaching 1 signatures the head of the relevant department will be made aware of the matter.
This ePetition ran from 13/02/2018 to 04/04/2018 and has now finished.
216 people signed this ePetition.
Thank you for your petition expressing disappointment at the proposed removal of the level 2 service Sexual Health Service at the University of Nottingham Health Service.
I recognise that University of Nottingham Health Service has provided a valuable service targeting the student population and providing a weekly GP-led, sexual health clinic. Since it was commissioned, however, a new universal, integrated sexual health service has been implemented in Nottingham. This provides open access and operates at various locations across the City; students will be able to visit six days a week on an appointment or walk-in basis.
The contract to provide the level 2 Sexual Health Services ended on the 31st of March 2018. Whilst we appreciate the value that discretionary services such as the University of Nottingham Health Service add to patient choice and access, during times of severe cuts to our operating budget, we cannot continue to provide those, which are additional and complementary to our core provision. Nonetheless, the University of Nottingham Health Service will still provide level 1 services such as asymptomatic screening for chlamydia for 15-24 year olds, asymptomatic testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and provide contraception including long-acting reversible contraception. GPs can continue to provide C-card (the free condom distribution scheme). The c-card also has distribution points at various locations on or near the University of Nottingham campus.
The GP core contract also enables GPs to provide testing and/or treatment for patients whose symptoms are indicative of STIs symptomatic. GPs can refer to Integrated Sexual Health Services (ISHS) who provide a comprehensive service that incorporates contraception, sexual health and GUM services. Nottingham City Council does not identify students as a group who experience issues with travel and ISHS clinics are situated across the city. In terms of LGBT students, ISHS targets support to these populations in recognition that some citizens that identify as LGBT may need tailored support. In addition, Nottingham City Council commissions services from Terence Higgins Trust who have a presence in Nottingham city centre.
Of course, I fully appreciate that any reductions in services provided to our citizens are unwelcome. However, it is important to understand the context in which this decision has been made. Since 2010, the Government has reduced the funding it gives to Nottingham City Council every single year by eight-figure sums. Our Government Revenue Support Grant has been cut from £126 million in 2013/14 to £34 million in 2018/19.
Any normal business would have been unable to survive that level of revenue reduction, certainly not without major structural change and a reduction in its activities. However, in our case, we have had to do this at the same time that the cost of caring for vulnerable children and adults is rising significantly, putting enormous pressure on the council’s budget. Make no mistake, the Government is ultimately trying to shift the cost of social care from it being funded nationally to it being funded through council tax. This is not only unfair but ultimately inadequate as it comes nowhere near to covering the rising costs or replacing the money taken from Nottingham’s Government Revenue Support Grant. Indeed, the stark reality is that unless Government gets a grip on this issue, and drives through a strategically thought through and properly funded integration program to integrate health and social care (the present attempts are far from that) we will soon see reductions in services far greater than those seen so far. We are doing everything we can to protect services and would not be making this decision if we had another choice. The Government’s approach to funding for local authorities has consequences however, and has left us in this invidious situation.
Clearly, I am acutely aware that Nottingham University is an