Cost of survival

Why blood banks will continue overcharging patients despite government capping the price

Maharashtra officials have hauled up a Mumbai blood bank for overcharging patients. But the problem runs deep.

Maharashtra’s Food and Drug Administration initiated action against a south Mumbai hospital for allegedly overcharging patients for blood and its components including platelets. Last week, the hospital was issued a notice by the drug authority for selling single donor blood platelets to a patient for Rs 12,000 when the price for the same is fixed at Rs 11,000 by the National Blood Transfusion Council.

To curb the menace of overcharging, the council in 2014 had issued guidelines fixing the price of blood and its components. It prescribed processing costs based on whether the processing blood bank was privately run or run by the government. More than 2,700 blood banks operate in India which includes government, charitable and private blood banks.

Despite capping the price, blood banks continue to overcharge, said officials monitoring blood banks. Take the case of Wockhardt Hospital’s blood storage unit, which FDA officials allege was charging patients for tests they never ran. “They sold five units of platelets to patients without running a test called NAT," said Madhuri Pawar of the FDA. NAT is an advanced sensitive nucleic acid test that detects the presence of recent HIV infections in the blood. "However they charged the patient for NAT testing,” Pawar added.

Despite repeated attempts, the hospital was not available to comment on the issue.

Last year the Maharashtra FDA surveyed 310 blood banks and found that 74 were overcharging patients. However, the blood banks were let off the hook after a meeting with the State Blood Transfusion Council where they agreed to not overcharge patients.

According to Dr RS Gupta, director of the national council, around 36 blood banks in the country have been penalised for overcharging patients since February 2014, which is when the notification was passed. “The rates are fixed and all blood banks should follow it,” said Gupta.

Helpless officials

Senior FDA officials said that the Drugs and Cosmetics Act does not empower them to take punitive action against blood banks for overcharging.

“There is big loophole,” said AK Malhotra who works with the Drug Licencing and Controlling Authority in Uttar Pradesh, a state with 275 operational blood banks. “The problem is even if we find a blood bank overcharging patients the law does not allow us to suspend or cancel their licence.”

The FDA in each state is the licence issuing authority for blood banks. However, they said that there is no mention anywhere of price control as a prerequisite for a licence. “Even if they overcharge, technically they are not violating the conditions on which they were issued the licence,” explained Malhotra.

The Maharashtra FDA worked around these technicalities and asked the State Blood Transfusion Council to initiate action against the erring blood banks. In fact, this council issues a no-objection certificate to a blood bank on the basis of which it applies they apply for a licence. “We have asked the local corporation as well as the Council to initiate action against the banks,” said Pawar. “If the Council revokes their no-objection certificate, we can cancel their licence.”

This, however, is easier said than done.

In the past, blood banks that were found to be overcharging patients in Maharashtra, were left scot-free after the Council issued a warning.

Malhotra feels that the number of complaints the council gets does not reflect the extent of overcharging. “We have only got two complaints regarding overcharging,” said Malhotra. He suspects that lack of awareness about the government’s notification is responsible for the small number of complaints.

Echoing the sentiment Dr Bharat Singh, director of the Delhi Blood Transfusion Council, said that it is widely known that blood banks, especially those run by corporate hospitals, overcharge patients. “The problem is that we don’t have a provision under the current Act to take action against these banks,” said Singh. “We need a legislation fixing the price for blood. The Council has already informed the ministry about the issue.”

Singh said that patients rarely complain because they are comfortable paying for the services of an expensive hospital.

Control replacement donations instead

People working with non-profits working on blood donation said that the biggest challenge for patients is not price. “The problem with blood banks is that they expect relatives of patients to arrange for blood,” said Vinay Shetty from Think Foundation, a non-profit that helps organise blood donation camps among other activities.

Shetty receives several calls from harried relatives looking for a blood donor. “The bank can always take the blood unit or component from another blood bank but they insist that the relative brings in a donor who donates blood at their facility,” said Shetty. “Sometimes the patient’s surgery is also done but the bank insists on a replacement.”

The National Blood Transfusion Council disallows replacement blood donation. Blood banks are expected to conduct regular donation drives and collect blood voluntarily. “By forcing the relative to get a replacement, the banks are indulging in some form of coercion,” said Shetty.

Experts said that the council has made blood costly for the poor by fixing its price. “The government banks are following the price set by NBTC which is out of reach for many poor patients. They should look at subsidising the cost of blood for poor,” said Shetty.

To control this menace of replacement donors, the council has allowed blood banks to have a bulk transfer of blood and its components between them. By transferring blood between banks, the relatives of patient seeking blood will be spared from running around.

Even with blood banks rampantly flouring the guidelines, blood transfusion councils are reluctan tto take very stringent action. As Gupta explained, “If we close blood banks, the community living around it gets affected, which we don’t want.”

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Teamwork Arts and not by the Scroll editorial team.