Development of Health Care - Assignment Example

of the of the Concerned 25 July 2009 Development of Health Care In the post II World War Britain, when the Labour clinched a landslide victory under Prime Minister Clement Attlee, it had before it the awesome and intimidating task of rebuilding a shattered and battered nation. As far as the state of employment in the UK was concerned, it wryly enjoyed a situation of full employment with most of the young men serving in the army and a great number of women employed in the factories (Donnelly 1999). The plight of housing in the UK was far from bearable, The World War left the UK with 2,00,000 smothered houses and an almost double the number dilapidated and in need of immediate repair (Donnelley 1999). The awesome task of reconstruction was being restrained by a dire shortage of men and material. The masses were clamouring for food and shelter and most of the resourceful squatters took over the abandoned military barracks. The young men relieved of army duty were to face a hopeless situation defined by abject shortage and brooding unemployment (Pope 1991). All the resources and professionals being dedicated to the War efforts; the education system had crumbled and needed immediate attention (Pope 1991). Civic amenities were far from being sufficient and suitable and the poor simply could not afford the cost of health care and hygiene (Pope 1991). The release of Beveridge Report under such circumstances marked the ushering in of an idea that was badly needed and required. This report smacked of an unwavering spirit of national altruism and intended to attack the looming menaces of unemployment, lack of hygiene, ignorance, disease and poverty. The masses were intrinsically aware of the massive scope of this report is amply testified by the fact that more then 600,000 copies of it were sold all across the UK (Timmins 1995). The II World War inculcated within the British masses a spirit of unity and cohesion that defied all pecuniary and educational differences (Stevenson 1990). In fact such an unprecedented unity was necessary to defeat the Nazi Germany, given its vast resources and might. The British masses willingly bore with the hardships, scarcity and want imposed by the coalition government under Winston Churchill to divert the scarce resources to war efforts. The politicians and the leadership of the times felt a dire need to reward the British working class for its forbearance and sacrifice by ushering in reforms that were to give way to a more egalitarian society (Stevenson 1990). The UK government deputed Sir William Beveridge to draft a report that was to be the basis of a pragmatic policy targeted at helping low-income groups in Britain (Hills, Ditch & Glennerster 1994). The report furnished by Beveridge in December 1942 proposed that all the working age citizens ought to be made to pay a weekly levy. The funds accumulated through the accrual and management of these weekly contributions were to be used by the state to help people who were needy unemployed or retired. Beveridge called for a minimal standard of living that was to be mandatorily extended by the state to all the poor and needy. The Labour government elected in 1945 resorted to the suggestions made by the Beveridge Report to chalk out measures that were to form the basis of a modern welfare state (Hills, Ditch & Glennerster 1994). The concept of a welfare state includes within its ambit the need to resorting to public and statutory measures to extend the agreed upon minimal standards of living to the deprived and marginalized individuals and groups across the society. In an ideal scenario, the objective of any welfare state is to strive to eradicate poverty, to ensure an all-inclusive distribution of resources and national wealth to promote and enhance social cohesion and unity. In consonance with the above-mentioned ideals, the Beveridge exclusively attacked the evils of ill health, lack of education, lack of hygiene, unemployment and poverty (Hills, Ditch & Glennerster 1994). This report assigned a great importance to social insurance and held that poverty could be ameliorated by establishing a system that extended a social and economic security to the individual on behalf of the state. Beveridge report made groundbreaking recommendations like the institutionalization of a national health service, making provisions for the state assistance and help to the poor, granting family allowances, and to continually strive for the achievement and sustenance of an economy oriented around the goal of assuring a full employment in the state (MacQuillan 2000). Beveridge Report happened to be a revolutionary and epoch-making document that was to change forever the way the concept of welfare was perceived and practiced in the UK. Until date, all the welfare oriented measures and provisions in the UK had their moorings in the theological concepts and principles that perceived the poor as a nasty, but unavoidable burden. Beveridge Report not only secularized the notion of welfare, but also vouched for a marked change in the status of the needy citizenry, elevating it to the centre of the state policies, far from being a dehumanized and marginalized segment of the British society. The second achievement of Beveridge Report was that it supported a formal institutionalization of the welfare policies and measures enunciated by the state, thus making welfare a duty and onus of the state that could not be interfered in or distorted by the vested interests. Beveridge report not only strived for social insurance for the deprived and needy segments of the society, but also for the first time brought in the element of respect and dignity to such aid. The relevance of Beveridge Report lied in the fact that it took a holistic view of poverty that was sustained and perpetuated by a vicious spiral of ignorance and want. The Beveridge Report for the first time threw light on the hitherto hidden aspects of poverty and need in the UK. It included within its ambit a whole range of measures that were to address all the aspects of poverty, be it ignorance, disease, unemployment, squalor or want. Hence, there is no denying the fact that Beveridge Report truly warrants to be called a document that laid the foundations of the UK as a modern welfare state. Since the onset of the 19th century, zealous philanthropists and social workers had been trying hard to extend free medical aid and assistance to the poor (BBC 1998). However, in the absence of any proper state backing and help, such measures often ended up being well-intentioned gestures that were devoid of any practical strength and capability. The few medical facilities established by such reformers were primarily dedicated to the task of caring and looking after the poor suffering from deathly ailments. However, the related and supposedly less important ailments like caring for the old and mentally challenged received little private or state attention and care. In the absence of any valid institutions, the suffering poor were often huddled in pathetic institutions that scarcely qualified to be called a medical facility. Many were forced to rely on dubious homemade remedies or on the doubtable procedures performed by the quacks offering their services free. The workers earning minimal wages were given healthcare however, their dependants and family members were often not that lucky. A majority of the poor simply did not afford the fee asked for by the recognized and credible hospitals. Undoubtedly, health was a costly privilege appropriated specifically by the rich and the well to do (Stevenson 1990). The Dawson Report released sometime after the I World War was the first major publication that recommended the establishment of a national health service under the administration and management of the state (BBC 1998). The 1926 Royal Commission on National Health Insurance was the second vital stimulus that suggested the constitution of a health service to be sustained and funded by the taxpayers' money (BBC 1998). An inquiry commissioned by the government in 1941 revealed gross discrepancies existing in the healthcare facilities in the UK (BBC 1998). The charitable hospitals were more then often short of funds and resources, whereas the municipal hospitals were notorious for their filth and poor hygiene. Under such circumstances, the government was under a more then average pressure to take heed of such a pathetic state of health care in the UK. Beveridge Report was the final momentous impetus that tilted the government's decision in the favour of the creation of the National Health Service (NHS) in 1942. It was a document that led to the genesis of a thriving National Health Service (NHS) that was to be one of the three vital pillars of a worthwhile social security system. Following the publication of two White Papers delving on the teething problems faced by the National Health Service (NHS), this state responsibility was solemnly legalized by ratification in the year 1946 (BBC 1998). The origin of the National Health Service (NHS) once and for all guaranteed that all the British citizens were to have unhampered access to a free and quality health care system, irrespective of one's social stature, gender, age, ethnicity, race and profession. Thus, National Health Service (NHS) that was a much needed and aspired for ideal became a practical and accessible reality for the British masses, courtesy the Beveridge Report. NHS is universal in its scope and extends full coverage to all the British citizens (University of London 2009). NHS adheres to non-price rationing (University of London 2009). The referral system adopted by NHS allows for an optimal utilization of the resources and health professionals (University of London 2009). All the funds required for running NHS are garnered through direct taxation. To ameliorate the geographical disparities existing in the health care system is one of the primary objectives of NHS. Over the years, reforms have been introduced in NHS to make it more responsive and accountable. NHS was reformed in 1989 to bring it in line with sound market oriented policies (University of London 2009). The objective of these reforms was to introduce efficiencies in NHS. The entire system was redesigned to encourage an efficient and cost effective delivery of health services by enforcing accountability on the purchasers and the providers of health services in the UK. The objective of these reforms was to separate the roles of purchasers and providers in NHS and to create efficiencies through competition (University of London 2009). However, the reforms introduced in 1989 failed to achieve their purpose and hence the whole system was once again reoriented to stress on cooperation instead of competition. This lead to the creation of Primary Care Groups (PCG) and Primary Care Trusts (PCT), allocated with varied levels of autonomy (University of London 2009). Once again, the focus of the health authorities was shifted to the task of planning rather then purchasing. NHS eventually became more centralized with the establishment of The National Institute for Clinical Effectiveness (NICE) and Commission for Health Improvement (CHIMP) (University of London 2009). Nice was trusted with the task of reviewing vital areas of treatment while CHIMP was to assure efficiency in NHS. One major objective of these reforms was to address the salient causes of ill health originating from inequalities like deprived areas, unemployment and low wages (University of London 2009). Steps were taken to improve the patients' access to NHS and to recognize the trusts providing efficient services (University of London 2009). Before the inception of NHS, health care in Britain was a coveted luxury. Every year, thousands of people died of curable infections and maladies. NHS not only provided reliable healthcare to many, but also transformed the life of a large number of citizens. Despite the acerbic criticism heaped on NHS, overall, it has proven to be a great success. The average life expectancy in the UK has increased by ten years, then what it was in 1948 (BBC 1998). Besides, the multifarious advances in the medical science and technology have manifold bolstered the efficacy and utility of NHS. However, NHS has still not been able to achieve its full potential owing to financial constraints. The Beveridge Report published in 1942 led to the creation of NHS. For the first time the health care in Britain was made universal and affordable. Like any crucial framework, NHS has been continuously reformed and improved to make it more efficient and cost effective. Though beset with pressing financial shortages, NHS has been more or less able to extend reliable and dependable health care to the people in the last six decades. Works Cited Donnelly, Mark 1999, Britain in the Second World War, Routledge, New York. Hills John, Ditch & Glennerster 1994, Beveridge and Social Security, Oxford University Press, London. MacQuillan, R 2000, Reflection on the welfare state, 1 June 2000, Contemporary Review, HighBeam Research, viewed 26 July 2009 NHS Reforms, 2009, Queen Mary Economics Department, University of London, viewed 26 July 2009, Pope, Rex 1991, War and Society in Britain, Longman, London. Stevenson, John 1990, British Society 1914-1945, Penguin, London. The NHS: One of the greatest achievements in history, 1 July 1998, viewed 25 July 2009, Timmins, Nicholas 1995, When Britain demanded fare shares for all, 27 July , The Independent, HighBeam Research, viewed 26 July 2009 Read More