
Mother-of-one, 27, crippled by her 36K breasts forced to pay for own reduction op after the NHS refused
Caitlin Telford, 27, from Glasgow, has suffered with excruciating back pain for years having been rejected by the NHS for breast reduction surgery when she was just 17-years-old, and already sporting a size 32G chest.
By the time she was just 25-years-old her breasts had ballooned to a whopping 36K, after the birth of her son Luca in January 2023.
But the young mother, now in constant pain and having developed grooves in her shoulders from the sheer weight of her breasts, was refused treatment once again.
'It just puts you down as you feel like no matter how much weight you lose, because you have a bigger chest you're never going to be a weight that you can be,' she said.
Ms Telford said she felt 'hopeless', uncomfortable in her own body but unable to afford the £10,000 it would cost to have the surgery done privately in Britain.
'By the time I had left primary school, I was already bigger than most of the girls in my class and they just continued to grow and grow,' she recalled.
She added: 'They were getting in the way of everything and I would get a lot of unsolicited male attention when I went out.'
At 17, Ms Telford visited her GP for a consultation which she hoped would lead to breast reduction surgery.
'But the doctors pawned me off and said because I was young, I hadn't stopped growing so they would not put me forward for it,' she said.
'Then the pain started across my back. I was also developing grooves in my shoulders where my bra was pulling on them constantly.'
Before becoming pregnant with her son, Ms Telford did everything she could to lose weight in the hopes that this would make her an appropriate candidate for surgery, dropping an impressive five stone to help her case.
'I went back to the doctor when I'd lost the weight and I got rejected again,' she said.
'It was annoying as they seemed to be taking my overall weight for my BMI and not thinking about the weight of my chest,' she added.
At the beginning of this year, after seeing people celebrating New Years Eve in little dresses, she recalled thinking: 'I just can't do this anymore'.
In a final effort to end her misery, Ms Telford started looking for private clinics further afield.
Ms Telford said when she used to go out she would get a lot of unsolicited male attention from the age of just 17-years-old, already sporting a 32G chest
Her surgery means that she will no longer have to take painkillers to manage her symptoms and has already boosted her confidence ahead of her birthday when she is looking forward to wearing a strapless top
She was then recommended a clinic in Istanbul, Turkey, who offered to do the reduction surgery for just £3,600 less than half of the £10,000 she was quoted in the UK.
Using a loan from her parents, Ms Telford underwent the 'life changing' operation last month that saw her drop 11 cup sizes to a modest C-cup.
'A few people I knew had been to Turkey, and the price difference was unreal,' she said.
'I'm very happy with my new breasts and it's changed my life.
'Now I can put on a vest top and not feel like I'm exposing myself.
Ms Telford is not the only woman suffering pain from large breasts who has been denied surgery on the NHS.
However, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde maintains that only cases meeting all necessary criteria are considered for breast reduction surgery, through a clinical assessment which considers the severity of symptoms and overall health.
Whilst some experts are concerned that women are seeking these procedures for cosmetic reasons, Dr Judy Evans, honorary secretary at the Royal College of Surgeons in Edinburgh, told the BBC that far too often women are being dismissed.
She said: 'Breast reduction is an operation which can free people from neck pain, from back pain and enable them to look after their children better.
'It's the most wonderful operation in terms of what it does for the person, but also I believe in the long term it saves a lot of money for the NHS.'
While Ms Telford enjoyed success by going overseas for surgery medics have warned Britons to be wary of going overseas for cheaper procedures.
At least 25 Britons are known to have died during or shortly after surgery in Turkey in recent years.
Many more have been injured, with some requiring life-saving care upon return to the UK for complications like infections.
While all surgery carries risks, campaigners and surgeons have urged patients to thoroughly do their research before opting to go under the knife overseas.
Breast reduction surgery is usually carried out under general anaesthetic and involves repositioning the nipple, removing excess fat and tissue and reshaping the remaining breast.
It takes around two to three hours and often requires patients to stay in hospital overnight to recover.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
10 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Half of black women in UK who raise concerns during labour did not receive suitable help, study finds
Almost half of pregnant black women raised concerns to healthcare professionals during labour, with half saying that their concerns were also not properly addressed, according to the largest report of its kind. Black women in the UK are up to four times more likely to die during childbirth compared with their white counterparts, and are also more likely to experience serious birth complications and perinatal mental health illnesses. Five X More, an organisation dedicated to improving black maternal health outcomes, confirmed these findings through a study of the maternity experiences of more than 1,000 black and mixed-race people who were pregnant between July 2021 and March 2025. The report found that more than half (54%) of respondents experienced challenges with healthcare professionals, and that just under a quarter (23%) of black women did not receive pain relief when they requested it. And of these women, 40% said they were given no explanation as to why that was the case. Furthermore, 45% of respondents raised concerns during their labour and of these, under half (49%) said their concerns were not properly addressed. Tinuke Awe and Clotilde Abe, the co-founders of Five X More, said that the report shows that the maternity system is failing black women, and that it is also a 'call to action' to address these disparities. 'Black women deserve better care and communication. The statistics around black women dying in and around pregnancy and having adverse outcomes have been around for decades now. Black women deserve to be treated with dignity at every stage of their maternity journey and the burden cannot keep falling on them to make the system work,' they said. 'While we're still seeing the same issues we raised years ago, such as systemic failings, being ignored in pain, and poor understanding of conditions affecting black women, new themes are also emerging like the emotional toll of self-advocacy and the impact of not having consistent or trusted care.' The research also found that only six in 10 respondents rated their antenatal care as good or high quality, while almost a third (28%) reported experiencing discrimination, and only a fifth had been informed on how to make a complaint. One respondent who, after having had an emergency C-section, said she had to constantly call the nurses to give her pain relief, said: 'I was in excruciating pain and also was sick for 13 hours and received more support from other mothers and their partners on their ward than from the midwives … I was treated really poorly.' The health and social care committee is in the middle of an inquiry into black maternal health and, earlier this month, the health secretary announced the launch of a national maternity investigation. Paulette Hamilton, the MP for Birmingham Erdington and chair of the all-party parliamentary group on black health, said the findings were 'deeply troubling', but 'sadly not surprising'. 'Black women continue to face systemic inequalities in maternity care, from discrimination and unmet pain relief to dismissed concerns. These shocking figures expose a healthcare system that too often fails black mothers and puts lives at risk,' Hamilton said. 'We urgently need better training, greater accountability and culturally competent care. No woman should ever feel unheard or unsafe when bringing life into the world.' The Department of Health and Social Care said: 'These findings are unacceptable. No woman should go unheard, dismissed or discriminated against while going through maternity care. 'Ending these inexcusable inequalities will be a key area of focus in the upcoming national maternity and neonatal investigation, which will help deliver safe and compassionate maternity care for all women, no matter who they are.'.


Sunday Post
13 minutes ago
- Sunday Post
Medics and charities back survivors' plea for ban on sunbeds
Get a weekly round-up of stories from The Sunday Post: Thank you for signing up to our Sunday Post newsletter. Something went wrong - please try again later. Sign Up Doctors, cancer patients and charities are calling for a ban on sunbeds because of their link to potentially fatal skin cancer. They are appealing to the Scottish and UK Governments to follow Australia, Brazil, and now Ireland, in moving to outlaw them in a bid to tackle rising numbers of patients with malignant melanoma. The medics and medical charities cite the burden skin cancer places on patients and the NHS. The plea for a ban follows recent moves by the Irish government to investigate ways of banning commercial sunbeds. The country's health authorities say they are swayed by the fair Celtic complexion being more susceptible to skin cancer from UV rays, and the growing health costs of treating patients with the malignancy. © Shutterstock / RomanRuzicka Cancer Research UK say cases of the most serious skin cancer, malignant melanoma, have soared by a third in the past decade across all age groups including young adults. The cancer is triggered by UV radiation damage to the DNA in skin cells. Last year a UK-wide survey by charity Melanoma Focus found that 28% of adults say they use sunbeds. In Scotland, based on a small sample, the figure was 24%. One of the most alarming findings of the survey was that across the UK, 43% of 18 to 25-year-olds use sunbeds. The charity also found that 34% of UK 16 and 17-year-olds are using sunbeds, despite a legal ban for under-18s. The charity says that around 100 deaths a year are linked to sunbed use across the UK. In hospital dermatology cancer clinics, Scottish skin specialists report regularly seeing patients with stage four melanomas, many of whom say they have used sunbeds. Some of the patients are still in their 20s, said speciality dermatologist Dr Amy Perkins of Forth Valley Health Board. 'I see them at clinic shocked and distressed by the diagnosis of a serious cancer and the surgery and treatment to have to undergo to survive,' she said. 'They struggle to accept that what they thought was essentially cosmetic treatment has increased their risk of melanoma.' Cancer Research reports that people who start using sunbeds before the age of 35 are 87% more likely to develop melanoma. 'People who had ever used a sunbed were 20% more likely to subsequently develop melanoma, compared to people who had never used one,' it adds. Dr John Ferguson, from St Andrews, works as a consultant dermatologist at Guy's & St Thomas' hospital in London. He points to the British Photodermatology Group (BPG) call for a complete ban on commercial sunbeds in the UK to reduce skin cancer and eye disease. Sunbeds also increase the risk of eye cancers, especially in those starting sunbed use before 20, research reports. Dr Ferguson, a BPG committee member, said: 'The evidence linking sunbed use to melanoma is considerable and presents a heavy toll on patients and health care cost. 'Telling a patient they have stage four melanoma is one of the most difficult tasks I have as a dermatologist. 'It is time we banned sunbeds because of the considerable risk to skin cancer.' Its statement calling for a ban says: 'Early sunbed use is associated with the highest increase in skin cancer risk. 'Sunbed use is addictive and associated with smoking, excessive alcohol consumption and other unhealthy behaviours.' Some 16 years have passed since the World Health Organisation's cancer research arm, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified ultraviolet light emitted from tanning beds as carcinogenic. Charity SKCIN has joined the call for a ban, denouncing current sunbed regulation which limits use to over-18s. 'Sunbed regulations are outdated, ineffective and not being adhered to – with an alarming percentage of under-18s regularly using them,' it says. 'Underage usage is rapidly increasing and fuelled by tanning trends and misinformation, influencing millions of children on social media daily. 'With melanoma rising faster than any other cancer in Britain and one of the biggest lethal malignancies in the 15-34 age group.' So what would the savings be to the NHS in skin cancer treatment? Manchester University scientists say that even at a conservative estimate, a ban along with a public information campaign, would prevent over 200 deaths among 18-year-olds in England alone. More importantly, over 1,000 young people would be spared melanoma and 200 lives would be saved. Gilly Perkins, general manager of The Sunbed Association, said: 'It is chronic over-exposure to the UV light that may increase the risk of skin cancers, mainly non-melanoma skin cancers. For melanoma, intermittent sun exposure and sunburn increase the risk. A sunbed session taken in a professional salon is a controlled, regular dose of UV without burning.' She added: 'UV exposure carries risk if abused – whether from a sunbed, beach holiday, or a garden lounger. But professional tanning salons operate under strict safety regulations designed to minimise those risks. We promote moderation, non-burning exposure, staff training, customer screening and education.' She argued UV exposure benefits cardiovascular health, and modern sunbeds are safer than older ones. 'For many sunbed users, it's not about ignoring risk – it's about managing it.' The Scottish Government said: 'We continue to monitor the effect of sunbed use and advise anyone using them to consider the risks of doing so.' 'I want to see them banned in Scotland. No one deserves to live like this' © Andrew Cawley Claire Gibson, 40, from Edinburgh, has endured years of cancer surgery and scans for a melanoma skin cancer after occasionally using sunbeds as a teenager. Areas of tissue have been removed from her right arm in doctors' latest attempt to save her. She is adamant that she wants to see the government ban commercial sunbeds to spare others the trauma, treatment and continual worry of cancer. The management and systems accountant at the National Galleries of Scotland, said: 'I wish I had never gone near a sunbed but like many teenagers, I thought I would look better with a tan. 'It is now my dearest wish to see them banned in Scotland and the rest of the UK because no one deserves to live like this. 'It is deeply concerning to know that melanoma is now among the most common cancers in teenagers and young adults.' She is waiting for her latest biopsy results after yet more surgery to remove tissue from a suspicious mole on her right arm. 'My treatment to date has been a wide local incision (removal) to remove any surrounding cells and a sentinel lymph node biopsy to check that the melanoma has not extended further. 'Fortunately, it has not.' She says that she is dismayed when she sees high-street sunbed salons promoting sunbeds as healthy. 'My heart sinks when their adverts describe them as having 'health benefits'. 'I pass one on the way to work and wonder how they can possibly proclaim this when I and others have had malignant melanoma. 'I am trying to survive and hugely grateful for the vigilance of my doctors. 'I want everyone to know that melanoma is a real and serious consequence of using sunbeds. 'People who start using sunbeds before 35 have a 75% increased risk of that serious cancer.' Melanoma victim: No tan is worth dying for It was the death of a young journalist at the age of 26 from melanoma which sparked a national campaign for a ban on sunbeds in Australia. Clare Oliver's slogan, 'No Tan Is Worth Dying For', drove legislation through the Australian Parliament in 2016. She campaigned tirelessly, even on her deathbed in 2007, as she forced the Australian government to ban sunbeds and prevent them from killing anyone else. In her last days, Clare wept as she said: 'Don't follow the fad for a tan – look at me and choose life. I don't want to die at 26.' Her wish to see sunbeds banned was supported by leading Australian and global cancer scientist Professor Craig Sinclair. He says banning sunbeds would reduce deaths and costs to the NHS. 'If Scotland banned sunbeds, it would undoubtedly save lives and significantly reduce health care costs caused by skin cancer,' he said. 'Sunbeds, like tobacco, when used as directed significantly increases the risk of skin cancer.' He also dismissed the argument that sunbed shops would go out of business. 'The Australian experience of banning sunbeds more than a decade ago showed sunbed operators quickly reorientated their businesses to other cosmetic services and consumers moved to safer forms of skin treatments such as fake tanning and spray tans.' Scots GP Dr Michael Mrozinski, now working in the Australian bush, says he has treated skin cancer patients who used sunbeds before the ban. 'I worked in a skin cancer clinic in Melbourne for four years and sun damage from people who tan from the sun and used sunbeds is considerable,' he said. 'A sunbed is just a more concentrated form of UV and I hate having to give a skin cancer diagnosis to people as many don't realise how serious it is.'

Western Telegraph
14 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Almost half of people do not think 10-year plan will boost GP access
More than four in 10 also believe the 10-year plan will make no difference or will not improve waiting times in A&E. However, there is huge support for some of the ideas included in the blueprint, with the overwhelming majority backing the creation of neighbourhood health centres, the expansion of the NHS app and more mental health support in schools and colleges. The 10-year health plan was unveiled by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer earlier this month, and set out a series of shifts to bring care much closer to people's homes, reducing the reliance on hospitals and A&E. Key reforms include an enhanced NHS app, giving patients more control over their care, new neighbourhood health centres open six days a week and at least 12 hours a day, and new laws on food and alcohol to prevent ill health. A survey of 1,023 adults in Britain, conducted by Ipsos for the PA news agency, asked people how they think the plan will impact access to healthcare, such as getting a GP appointment, A&E waiting times and waiting times for routine hospital treatment. Some 35% said the plan will have no impact on getting a GP appointment, while 14% believe it will make things harder. This compares with the 29% of people who said they think it will make getting an appointment easier. More than a third (37%) said it will make no difference to waiting times in emergency departments, while almost one in 10 (9%), said they believe it could worsen waiting times, compared with 30% who said it will improve them. Meanwhile, 31% said the plan will have no impact on waiting times for hospital treatment, 11% believe the plan will worsen waiting times and 34% said they think the measures will help. However, a number of proposals outlined in the plan were strongly backed by the public. Some 84% said they supported the creation of a single patient record, while 78% backed the creation of neighbourhood health centres, 73% support the expansion of the NHS app and 72% are in favour of more mental health support in schools and colleges. However, more than a quarter (27%) of people do not support making hospitals fully AI enabled, compared with 44% who would back the move. Almost one in five (18%) said they would not support so-called 'patient power payments', which would allow patients to hold back some of the payment for their care if they are not satisfied, while 42% would support the measure. Some proposals aimed at helping people to lead healthier lives were also strongly supported. A ban on the sale of high-caffeine energy drinks was backed by 78% of people, while 69% back plans to restrict junk food advertising. However, almost one in five (18%) tended to disagree with measures that could see alcoholic drinks labelled with nutritional information, although 57% backed the move. One in four people think the measures included in the plan will make no difference to patients, the poll found. Almost one in 10 (9%) said they think the changes will make things worse, while 35% believe it will improve the health service. A similar proportion, 23%, said the 10-year health plan will make no difference to NHS staff, while 13% said it could make things worse and 33% believe it will have a positive effect. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'We're getting on with the job of delivering for patients, with NHS waiting lists falling by 260,000 since July 2024, delivering more than 4.6 million additional appointments since the general election and recruiting over 1,900 extra GPs to fix the front door of the NHS. 'Backed by an additional £29 billion, our 10-year health plan will seize the opportunities provided by new technology, medicines and innovation to deliver better care for all patients, no matter where they live or how much they earn, and better value for taxpayers. 'It is no surprise the plan is popular with patients, it was the result of the biggest conversation with staff, patients and the public since the formation of the NHS, with more than a quarter of a million contributions.'