Smear Tests Minimum Age
Should the minimum age in England be lowered to 20?
The Government has recently announced that following a review of the minimum age for smear tests in England, the age is to remain at 25 and not be lowered to 20 in line with the rest of the UK. The question is whether the Government’s decision following their recent enquiry is correct?
Arguments against lowering the minimum age
Women screened under the age of 25 are more likely to have a false positive result (i.e. an abnormal smear test result in the absence of abnormalities of the cervix). There is research to indicate that it is as high as 1 in 3 tests which return such a result, as opposed to 1 in 14 in older women.
One of the reasons for this is thought to be that when a woman becomes sexually active, the introduction of the HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) can prompt abnormal results that can correct themselves spontaneously over time. Critics to the age being lowered have indicated that although not all abnormal smear test results lead to further treatment, |
 |
some do and this could be potentially harmful as the treatment may involve cutting part of the cervix away, leaving it shortened and therefore more likely to open during pregnancy, which in turn leads to an increased risk of premature birth. Also, there is of course the risk of post treatment infection which could lead to injury.
Arguments for lowering the minimum age
Despite the Government’s stance on the issue, many campaigners have been left bitterly disappointed at the outcome of the enquiry, which was commenced after the untimely death of the late Jade Goody at the age of 27 following a highly publicised battle with cervical cancer. Had Jade been Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish, she would have been eligible for a smear test from the age of 20 and therefore her cancer may have been caught sooner and she may have stood a better chance of survival.
In addition to the obvious argument that the minimum age in England should be reduced to fall in line with the rest of the UK, it can be said that whilst there may be a higher likelihood of a false positive reading, an abnormal smear is commonly repeated before a woman is sent for more intrusive treatment. This then somewhat negates the risk of a woman having unnecessary treatment.
The minimum age for a smear test in England was previously reviewed in 2003 when it was increased from 20 to 25. A mere 6 years later and some tragic stories have emerged, including that of Jade Goody, of young women being diagnosed with cervical cancer in their twenties before the screening process began for them.
As being sexually active can cause cervical cells to change and in a society where some girls appear to be having sexual intercourse at a younger age, surely it is an anomaly not to reduce the age of screening in line with changes in society and youth culture?
Vaccines have now been introduced against HPV which is known to increase the risk of cervical cancer and is commonly found in sexually active women. In the UK, girls aged 12 and 13 are being offered this vaccine. How can the Government justify offering a vaccine against a known cause of cervical cancer to girls of a young age, but then not screen them for the disease for another 12 – 13 years, until they reach the age of 25?
Delayed Diagnosis
The question then follows as to when a woman could have a potential claim for delayed diagnosis of cervical cancer. This is one area where the anomaly between the minimum ages highlights the unjustifiable and unfair situation.
If a woman in England has cervical cancer by the time she reaches 25, then she will have no claim against her doctors for clinical negligence. The doctors will not have behaved in a potentially negligent way by failing to send the woman for a smear test, unless she herself requested one or complained to the doctor of symptoms. However, by the time a woman is showing symptoms she may already have cancer.
However, if the woman is from any other part of the UK and has regular smears from the age of 20 but is unfortunately still diagnosed with cervical cancer because of negligence, for example results being misread or a failure to call the woman for the screening process, then she may indeed be able to pursue a claim for clinical negligence against her doctors and recover compensation.
How can this possibly be justified?
Summary
Reducing the age of smear tests in England may lead to a small percentage of women undergoing unnecessary treatment. But it could also save lives. And surely even if only one life is saved, then it is worth the risk of the test producing false positive results?
If you wish to support the campaign for lowering the minimum age of smear tests in England to 20, you can sign a Downing Street petition at:
Call us today
01244 312 306
for expert advice and a fast friendly service