when a medical professional submitted ashley’s documents, it was four days past the window, and because of that, she did not get adequate funding, stating that “there’s no protocol for that. so, it’s kind of like, if the doctor doesn’t do it for you, oh well.”
these situations, and the sheer cost of the drugs when people have to pay out of pocket, need to be addressed within the national strategy for drugs for rare diseases.
funding should also be considered in regard to qualifying diseases for various care programs. for example, someone living with diabetes is likely to have a much easier time applying for a mobility aid because it is well-known that these more common conditions are included on qualifying conditions lists. rare diseases, however, are not.
“our diseases will never be there because of their rarity,” said wong-rieger. “so, they’re not going to be, if you get supplemental assistance in the school (for example), it will not necessarily be recognized because those diseases are small numbers. they don’t end up on anybody’s named list.”
according to tea, provinces and federal governments must “be more creative from a funding model perspective” to accomplish this goal.
encourage patient engagement in the process of healthcare planning
giving the patient a seat at the table when discussing where the funding will be allocated, what drugs are being introduced, and how people can access them is vital when creating new strategies in the rare disease space. however, in the past, people living with rare diseases weren’t given as much weight in the conversation as they should be.
patient organizations, who also act as advocates and work tirelessly to improve access to care, provide resources, and support people in getting the proper medications for their rare diseases, are also somewhat slighted when it comes to these discussions, albeit less than the patients themselves, even if they bring valuable knowledge and insight into what truly needs to be done to change patients’ lives in a meaningful way.