Andy Burnham urged to set dementia waiting-time target

There is something quietly radical about demanding a waiting-time target for dementia. For decades, dementia has been treated as a slow, inevitable decline — something to be managed rather than confronted with the same clinical urgency as cancer. The former national cancer director's endorsement of an 18-week referral-to-treatment standard reframes the conversation entirely. It says: dementia is not a soft ending; it is a medical condition that deserves measurable, enforceable standards of care. The comparison to cancer is instructive. Cancer targets were controversial when introduced, dismissed by some as bureaucratic box-ticking that would distort clinical priorities. Yet they transformed the system — driving investment, reducing variation, and giving patients a legal-style guarantee that they could not be left in limbo. If dementia is to receive the same treatment, it would signal a genuine shift in how we value the cognitive health of our ageing population. Burnham, as a powerful metro mayor with devolved health powers, is uniquely positioned to pioneer this experiment. But there is a counterargument that deserves equal weight. Targets are only as good as the capacity behind them. An 18-week dementia diagnosis target means little if there are not enough memory clinics, geriatricians, and radiologists to meet it. Critics will warn that imposing a target without the accompanying investment simply creates waiting lists with a number attached — a false comfort for families. The former cancer director's support is notable, but it does not come with a funding cheque attached. Burnham must weigh the political benefit of a headline-grabbing commitment against the practical risk of failing to deliver it. Poli Split's view is that this is a healthy tension. The demand for a dementia target is a moral argument wearing a managerial hat. It forces politicians to be explicit about what they will guarantee, and it gives the public a yardstick by which to hold them accountable. Whether Burnham embraces it, modifies it, or rejects it, the very existence of the debate is progress. The question now is whether Greater Manchester — and by extension the rest of the UK — is ready to treat dementia with the same seriousness as the diseases we have already conquered in public consciousness. Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c50m3glzppgpo?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=rss