Explain Why The Nhs Should Not Be Abolished Or Privatized

One of the biggest obstacles to successful management of the NHS, and also to any analysis of its current well being, remains the significant lack of any valid information as to what the NHS does, how much it costs and where the money is spent. Indeed, it is perhaps surprising that 'the 1990 changes' were conceived and implemented as fast as they were, given the lack of information that was available in 1988. (Ham, 1996) Attempts were made at the start to ensure that hospitals began from a 'level playing field' so that they were in fair competition with one another, but the sometimes 10 fold differences in the early quoted costs for identical services in different hospitals had as much to do with differing costs of maintaining buildings

The National Health System began in 1948 with the aim to provide free health care for the English thus removing health access inequities. This essay considers two strengths of the NHS, being free health and locally responsive health care and two weaknesses being the financial burden and unprecedented pressure on health care resources.

Starting with the organizational structure of the NHS, it is basically an umbrella organization that comprises of four regional branches, in particular, NHS (England), NHS Scotland, Health and Social Care in Northern Ireland and NHS Wales. The financing for all these institutions comes from a universal source, particularly the tax-payer money of residents of UK, although they operate to an extent as self-governing institutions. The treasury allocates money to the department of Health, which in turn allocates money to NHS England (Understanding the new NHS). In other words, the top executives of these four institutions take decisions independently for day to day operations although they abide by broader governing directives applicable to the UK region as a whole. Governance is an important aspect of the operating of the NHS, for without it exploitation by private vested interests is likely to happen. (National Health Service (NHS): A study of its Structure, Funding and Regulation, Strengths and Weaknesses, n.d.)

The National health services (NHS) provides a comprehensive healthcare services across the entire nation. It is considered to be UK’s proudest institution, and is envied by many other countries because of its free of cost health delivery to its population. Nevertheless, it is often seen as a ‘political football’ as it affects all of us in some way and hence everyone carry an opinion about it (Cass, 2006). Factors such as government policies, funding, number of service users, taxation etc all make up small parts of this large complex organisation. Therefore, any imbalances within one sector can pose a substantial risk on the overall NHS (Wheeler & Grice, 2000). This essay will discuss whether the NHS aim of reducing the nations need

It has been widely accepted that rationing of the National Health Service (NHS) is paramount to maintaining and balancing public resources. In a utopian world it would be possible to provide every patient with every medical treatment that they would require, however this is not possible and therefore rationing has to be applied by local health authorities. Simply, there are not enough resources and medical staff available to keep up with the ever evolving demands of the public, and once more, these medical resources can’t at times tend to the needs of the medical advancements made every day. Some equipment and medicines are extremely costly and the NHS struggles to balance public budgets in the face of such advancements. One survey of a primary care trust in the NHS found that the panel that made that decision about funding new treatments was faced with applications that would have

Some of the key arguments that exist in today’s NHS are how it is organised and managed, and how it is to be funded. Should the government pay for it? Should the taxpayers pay for it? Or should it be privately run?

In 1974 reform of the NHS seen eliminated the involvement of local authorities in health, set up community health councils, introduced area health authorities and changed the management of family doctor services (JISC 2015). The conservative Government reforms of the NHS bought much controversy, supporters claimed the reforms brought increased efficiency and effectiveness, but opponents said they undermined the founding principles of the health service (BBC 1999). However the spending cost of the NHS was a concern, with an ageing population and increase of new advance technology, experts said that the NHS needed above inflation increases of at least 1% a year simply to stand still (BBC 1999). The government, inspired by the Griffiths Report (1983), blamed disorganised management and structures within the NHS for the cash problems (BBC 1999). The National Health Service and Community Act of 1990 was the future explanation (BBC

The Secretary of State for Health, Andrew Lansley, has set out the government’s plans to reform the NHS in England. The plans, documented in a new white paper entitled ‘Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS’, state that more power will be given to patients and professionals in the design and delivery of health and social care. This briefing outlines a summary of the key reforms. Please note, some terms which require further clarification are explained in a glossary at the end of this document. The white paper focuses on four key areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. Putting patients and the public first Improving healthcare outcomes Autonomy, accountability and democratic

The National Health service is stretched primarily because of the rising demand from demographic changes combined with the growth of new and expensive technology. At the same time, the cut in spending on the on the NHS as a percentage of GDP is limiting its capacity to keep up with demand.

The NHS is a system that allows UK citizens to have free healthcare, to the point of use. However, immigrants and refugees, who have received diseases from their own country, come and abuse the NHS. The thing is, the NHS don't check any files and, even if you have just arrived in the UK, you will always be the subject of free healthcare. Consequently, the NHS suffers as a result of this. It is something that, along with many other things, needs to be fixed.

Developments in new technologies, new treatments, and new drugs may improve the ability of the NHS as the supplier, but at the same time it encourages demand to level that requires significantly exceeds supply. This will create a long waiting list and will lead to a shortage of beds in the hospital. NHS privatization will cause prices to rise to reflect the true cost of supply. However, rising costs have forced a re-think on funding.

The NHS also aimed to be financed by tax payers and national insurance contributors where working people and employers paid towards this in aid to pay for any healthcare from the NHS ‘’all will contribute to provide for all’’. They also aimed to be available to all regardless of wealth, social class, age, race and gender (www.slideshare.net). Alongside this they also provided for older people, mentally ill people, soldiers and everyone else as we all were eligible for care even individuals who were in the country visiting. (www.nhshistory.net)

In line with the majority of other developed countries, the United Kingdom (UK) has offered its citizens a universal health care system that is free at the point of service. Funded primarily by taxation, the system is popular and efficient. However, along with most other health care systems around the world, it faces a series of challenges if it is to maintain viability, in the twenty-first century. These issues include; long waiting times, an aging population, funding challenges and the increasing cost of technology.

The right to health care is tantamount to socialism and therefore should be left as the responsibility of an individual and not a function of the government to secure a person’s health care. Thus government’s provision of healthcare could reduce the availability and quality of healthcare, resulting to enormous government deficits and debts. This paper is going to explore the reasons why the government should not provide free health care to its citizens.

What Are the Arguments In Favour Of Private Health Care? Privatisation is a word which is commonly used to describe the practice of medical patients 'going private' and paying for the services of GPs, hospital doctors or hospital provision, rather than using the NHS. Privatisation can also be used to describe the charge imposed for such health care services such as drugs, appliances, dentures and spectacles. There are many arguments which are in favour of private health care in Britain, such as that private treatment is not the luxury that most people seem to think it is. Most people believe it is a treatment that only rich people can afford.