Rationing health care: moving the debate forward
- 22 June 1996
- Vol. 312 (7046) , 1553-1554
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7046.1553
Abstract
Groups in Britain are encouraging the debate that the government won't lead When governments and politicians do not act, the people may. In Britain neither the government nor the main opposition party will openly acknowledge the inevitability of rationing health care. Instead, they talk of increasing the effectiveness of health care, spending more on the health service, and setting priorities locally. Their implication to the public is that nobody will be denied potentially beneficial treatments. But almost all of those who spend any time studying this subject recognise that people have always been denied potentially beneficial treatments, and they always will be no matter how much is spent on health services. These commentators believe that governments should come clean with the public and lead a debate on how best to ration health care. Because British political leaders will not accept this challenge, various organisations and ad hoc groups have begun to try to find ways to include the public in the debate on rationing health care. Some of these initiatives are covered in this week's and last week's BMJ. Most commentators accept that rationing is inevitable, but the debate keeps returning …Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- The rationing agenda in the NHSBMJ, 1996
- Setting priorities: is there a role for citizens' juries?BMJ, 1996
- Media coverage of the Child B caseBMJ, 1996
- Rationing in general practice: The Asbury draft policy on ethical use of resourcesBMJ, 1996
- What can be concluded from the Oxcheck and British family heart studies: commentary on cost effectiveness analysesBMJ, 1996
- For Debate: Setting priorities: can Britain learn from Sweden?BMJ, 1996
- Health care rationing: the public's debateBMJ, 1996
- Patients' views of priority setting in health care: an interview survey in one practiceBMJ, 1995
- Priorities and rationing: pragmatism or principles?BMJ, 1995
- The BMA's annual representative meetingBMJ, 1994