[HPFGU-OTChatter] NHS query

[Kirsty Anne Wright]

> I have an NHS question.  In the US, it's only when parents can't
> afford it that Aid for Dependent Children (or whatever there is now,
> if anything ::breathes deeply, steers rapidly away from politics::)
> will pay.  If a child's parents refused to pay for glasses, well, that
> might be a matter for Child Protective Services (in time), or
> authorities might find some other way to insist that they pay, but I
> don't think any kind of social program would step in and do it for
> free.  A middle-class couple refusing to get needed glasses for their
> ward would be regarded as trying to chisel free glasses out of the
> system, rightly enough; they'd have to pay for them or risk being
> charged with neglect.  Wouldn't the Dursleys have grudgingly bought
> him the cheapest pair in the shop (and not, of course, replaced them
> as long as sellotape would do)?

Hi All
I never post on this list but thought I'd answer this as I actually knew it
on the NHS, presciptions for children are free including prescription
lenses, you get a certain amount towards the frames, I can't remember how
much during the 80's, but in 1999 when I was 17 I got approx 20 towards
frame and then you picked a pair and paid the difference, it would have been
a lot less in 80's but frames were also cheaper, especially kids frames as
they tend to be plastic, so the dursleys would probably simply have gotten
horrible cheap frames that were within the allowance and not had to pay
anything towards Harry's glasses. On the other hand you were entitled to a
new pair/presciption every 6 months, on the basis that your eyes would
improve so unless the first thing dudley did every time harry returned from
the opticians was break the glasses, or the dursleys never took him back for
check up's then there is no reason for his glasses to be held together with
sellotape, (however either of the above possibilities is in character for
the durleys)

Kirsty