Until a few months ago I admit I had never even considered the chaplaincy services in NHS hospitals around the UK. Like everyone I have lost relatives over the last few years, mostly grandparents, but none of them were ever religious so there was never a call for any visit by a chaplain. So until I visited the National Secular Society website I had never registered their existence.

Imagine my disgust, in fact I hope you share it, when I read that the estimated cost of the chaplaincy service for the NHS is more than £32 million a year. £32 million! In the grand scheme of the cost of running the NHS and the deficit it has, this is probably quite small, but for what it provides it is ridiculous. It is also disgusting in this financial climate and considering the amount of services (in many areas, not just the NHS) that the government is proposing to scrap to save money.

The NHS website, here, categorises the role of a chaplain under the heading of “spirituality” which to me smacks of trying to appease both sides of people (religious and non-religious). In fact they even say:

” For some people it means religious belief, but many believe that spirituality doesn’t have to be religious.”

Perhaps I’m wrong, but if you are offered support at the hospital for an issue that is not physical but psychological, is that not just counseling? Why have a separate service, if you like, that deals with “spiritual” matters (again, if you are not religious you may not believe in the concept of a soul or spirit in the traditional sense many people do) but try to dress it up as available to all types of people, if counseling is available anyway?

“It might be that you just need some space. Hospital chapels are not only for people who have religious faith. If at any time you need a quiet place to think, to pray or just to be alone, you can use the chapel.”

The chapel may not exclude people who are not religious, but as an atheist, I would feel very uncomfortable with going in to a place that is traditionally created for prayer and religious practices to have some space or be alone. Where are the rooms for the non-religious? Are there any? I’ve never seen one if there is. Please let me know if I am wrong.

“If the person you look after is terminally ill and receiving palliative care, and they would like spiritual support, this should be considered as an integral part of their care. Along with medical and physical needs, palliative care aims to look after the emotional and spiritual needs of patients, families and carers.”

I fully understand that people who are religious want religious support when they are terminally ill and do not think that this should be ignored. However, why should it be on the onus of the taxpayer to provide this? Surely if you are that connected to your faith and in need of support, a member of your local house of worship, whatever the faith, would be a hundred percent more appropriate than a stranger paid by the NHS to do the job.

In April 2009 the National Secular Society performed a Chaplaincy Costs Survey which you can see in full here. The outcome was that, of those hospitals and trusts that did respond to the survey, the cost of chaplains amounted to £26,722,494, roughly £48,953 per chaplain. As stated in the survey, these figures only account for the staff salaries and on-costs only, but not for the maintenance of the chapels, churches and various prayer rooms. So on top of those salaries there is extra expense. (I assume this accounts for the £32m figure as well as the estimate of those hospitals whose figures were not available).

To put this in perspective, here are a few examples of what this money could provide in the NHS:

That’s just a few of many, many other uses for that money. In fact, that last example was from the Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospital which is fund-raising for these incubators. According to the NSS Chaplaincy survey mentioned earlier, this specific hospital spends almost £100,000 annually on chaplains, yet they are having to raise money for equipment that can assist 150-200 newborn babies every year. For that money spent they could purchase two brand new incubators.

Where is the sense in this? Are we saying that people’s religious beliefs are more important than saving the lives of newborn babies or, for that matter, any lives? There are thousand of women across the UK who have been rejected NHS funded medication (such as Herceptin to treat early stages of breast cancer) because it is too costly (roughly £20,000 per year, although it does vary from case to case), even though it has been shown to reduced the risk of death by 1.8% over two years. Even if some medication does not save but prolong a patients life by months or years, this is surely a better use of NHS funds than to provide a service used by a minority in an increasingly secular society.

Nobody is saying that people should not have the right to religious support should they choose it but it is unjust and unacceptable to expect NHS taxpayers to fund this. If support and faith in difficult times of health is so important then the Catholic Church, the Church of England and every other faith organisation should be more than willing to fund it. If one purpose of the NHS is, and it should be, to supply psychological and mental support then the money would be better off being channelled in to general counselling where it can be used and appreciated by any and all patients who pay their taxes for this national service. Anything extra, anything religious based, is and should be the responsibility of the individual.

As an atheist, as a humanist and, I hope, a good human being, the thought of any tax I have ever paid funding a frivolous, religious service makes me feel sick. I want my money to have provided good services for everybody, from minor accidents to the best possible care for people dying of terminal illnesses to life saving treatments and operations, not to allow a small number of people to talk about and to, what I and many others believe, is a fictional character.

Advertisement