Ali Handscomb argues that ".. the role of government in healthcare is to balance what is affordable with best quality and outcomes for the people it serves" and that seems to be a point of view that it is difficult to argue against. However, the divided nature of politics in the UK - especially in the present coalition situation would suggest that large proportion of the people will not be so served. Whilst the government feels the need to tinker with health care provision and attempts to sell such tinkering as providing extra choice to service users, they seem to be missing two key points and they are these...when has increased choice ever been an issue and how does increased choice NOT translate into greater cost ( not less as proposed) Most people of my acquaintance want access to good health care, when they need it and they want it locally.
Many are not equipped to exercise any so-called choice since they don't consider different types of healthcare until they are in a position to need them. My fear is that by offering "choice" the danger of removing large elements of society from healthcare provision is extreme. I live in a fairly diverse neighbourhood where the middle-aged, (say those over 50) tend to be well educated professionals with small families and the younger element... not so much. It is clear that should the government sponsored choice materialise it will be driven by the vocal middle-aged. Good news for people like me who will need hip replacements one day, not so great for those who need teenage pregnancy midwives or drug addiction services. Cheaper though!
The choice that is being held up as the key outcome of the new NHS reforms seems to me disingenuous. Reform should not necessarily be the role of government, monitoring and auditing of service driven reform that is informed by all of the members of local communities should be
Many are not equipped to exercise any so-called choice since they don't consider different types of healthcare until they are in a position to need them. My fear is that by offering "choice" the danger of removing large elements of society from healthcare provision is extreme. I live in a fairly diverse neighbourhood where the middle-aged, (say those over 50) tend to be well educated professionals with small families and the younger element... not so much. It is clear that should the government sponsored choice materialise it will be driven by the vocal middle-aged. Good news for people like me who will need hip replacements one day, not so great for those who need teenage pregnancy midwives or drug addiction services. Cheaper though!
The choice that is being held up as the key outcome of the new NHS reforms seems to me disingenuous. Reform should not necessarily be the role of government, monitoring and auditing of service driven reform that is informed by all of the members of local communities should be
No comments:
Post a Comment