PHOTO
In the meantime, some other patients have contacted the newspaper about their worries. Health reporter Elspeth McLean relates the story of one family who wished to share their concerns.
Bruce is a private man. It is not hard to guess that sitting at his sunny dining room table discussing the intimate details of his health with a stranger would not feature on the top 10 list of things this 51-year-old would like to be doing.
He speaks quietly, gently. There is no raising of his voice. There is emotion, but it is measured. Occasionally, he smiles and attempts a wry joke. He insists that he is not telling his story because he wants people to feel sorry for him.
And while he may question some decisions made about his treatment, he does not want anyone to think he sees any of those involved as bad people.
"I am not bitter about it. I am not even angry. I wish it hadn't happened, but I have got to get on with life as best I can and I am going as far as I bloody well can."
He and his wife, Jan, wanted to tell their story so they could emphasise the importance of spending health money wisely - at the time when it could prevent illness or lessen the severity of it.
They believe that if Bruce had been given a colonoscopy sought in 2007 it would have picked up the bowel cancer before it had spread to other parts of his body when it was eventually diagnosed this year.
They question the priorities of a system which did not offer them this procedure which costs the public purse $1038, but which has now spent unknown thousands of dollars on surgery, chemotherapy, nursing visits and medicine, but too late.
While Bruce's medical care continues, the couple describe it as palliative.
"Any perception that they can't afford to do colonoscopies concerns me. They can't afford not to," says Bruce.
They also want greater recognition that colorectal cancer is not confined to old people and that symptoms suggestive of it should always be investigated thoroughly.
They want the people who make decisions about health care to know the impact those decisions may have, not just on the individual patient but their families as well.
Bruce and Jan, and their now 18-year-old daughter, lived in Australia for several years.
He had periods of rectal bleeding and his doctor in Australia suggested he needed a colonoscopy.
Rather than have it in Australia, he decided to pursue it soon after when the family returned to New Zealand.
In June 2007, his general practitioner in Otago referred him for a colonoscopy, noting that he had continued to have rectal bleeding.
The referral letter stated that he was to have had a colonoscopy in Australia.
In November 2007, he was turned down for a colonoscopy at Dunedin Hospital.
A letter from general surgery out-patients explained that he did not meet the guidelines, as there were no obvious risk factors.
He received a sigmoidoscopy, which did not find anything abnormal.
It was suggested that a simple surveillance test would be a check for blood in his faeces.
The couple say this was not done.
They say they were not advised they could have a colonoscopy done privately and did not realise this service was available.
Until May of this year, Bruce appeared to be in good health, but then began visiting his GP about a possible bladder/kidney infection with much accompanying pain.
An ultrasound was requested from Dunedin Hospital in June, and a letter arrived from the hospital on August 22 stating he was on the semi-urgent waiting list with a wait of up to 12 weeks.
In July, Bruce was made redundant and, unable to find work in New Zealand, he began to look around in Australia, finding a job in Brisbane.
He left for his new job in August, taking his doctor's notes with him so he could have further investigation of his "kidney" complaint.
Jan and his daughter were to follow later.
A day after he landed in Brisbane, he saw a doctor who ordered an ultrasound and X-rays.
Over 10 days his abdominal pain became increasingly severe and when he returned to the GP to discuss his ultrasound results, the GP sent him by ambulance to the local hospital.
There a CT scan discovered extensive cancer in his bowel, liver, lymph nodes and blood vessels.
The primary cancer was in the bowel.
Jan cancelled the packers and flew to Australia with her daughter to help him come home for treatment, a trip which cost the family $3500.
"I know how it felt for me, I can't imagine how it felt for Bruce to finish a normal working day, go to the GP for what he expected to be something routine and have this outcome," Jan says.
They arrived at Dunedin Hospital emergency department on Sunday, August 30, with a referral letter from the Redcliff Hospital in Brisbane which began "Please assist this unfortunate gentleman . . ."
Tests at Dunedin Hospital did not reveal a blockage.
Jan said they were told the hospital was full and since no urgent surgery was considered necessary, he was sent home that night.
They were advised they would hear from oncology out-patients that week. By Tuesday morning, Bruce was vomiting blood, she says. A return to the hospital showed the bowel was obstructed. The following Sunday, Father's Day, he underwent surgery.
" Some people get presents on Father's Day, but Bruce got a colostomy bag," Jan says.
The couple describe their situation as being emotionally and financially crippling.
Neither of them has work and they need Work and Income support to survive.
Bruce said while the couple had made their share of financial mistakes over the years, they had always paid their way and their decision to go to Australia was because he wanted to work and not have to go on the dole.
They estimate they have spent several thousand dollars because of the illness, including a $1000 Australian ambulance bill for a trip which was shorter than Mosgiel to Dunedin.
And while they come to grips with the day-to-day reality of Bruce's illness they can sometimes find it hard to cope with their treatment by other people.
He says they have had some amazing support but sometimes he felt a bit like a freak show - "it feels a bit like people are coming out of the woodwork and you don't have any control".
Other people's grief could be difficult to bear.
"You need positive support from people, not tragedy. You can't let it rule your life. None of us know how long we're going to live for. This is something we have to live with. We have to get on with life, however long we have got. You've got to give it your best shot," Bruce says.
The interview is almost over. I ask how long they have been married. Twenty-eight years last week is the answer.
" A long time," Jan says.
"We're going to be married a lot longer," Bruce says.
They look at each other and smile.
• Bruce and Jan asked the Otago Daily Times not to use their surname and some other identifying details in this article to protect their privacy.