JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK Archives


HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK Archives

HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK Archives


HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK Home

HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK Home

HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK  October 2011

HEALTH-EQUITY-NETWORK October 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: The Rio Political Declaration on Social Determinants of Health

From:

"Ingleby, J.D. (David)" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Ingleby, J.D. (David)

Date:

Tue, 25 Oct 2011 08:56:20 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (70 lines)

 
Hallo Axel 

I do think the point Alex is making is a serious one and deserves a serious answer. Of course the Rio Declaration doesn't tell governments HOW to provide a "universal, comprehensive, equitable, effective, responsive and accessible quality health system" (NB: not just a "quality health system"). It says, in effect, that whatever system governments choose for, it should have those properties.

Alex believes, along with many others, that the Health and Social Care bill is not going to give the UK a health system with those properties. If that is correct, then it is inconsistent for the government to support both the Rio Declaration and the bill. If you disagree, then presumably it's because you disagree about the likely effects of the bill. This is a very important issue and it somewhat surprises me that there has been so little serious discussion about it on this list.

To my mind, the debate about the bill in the UK has been handicapped by an oversimplified contrast between market-based and state-regulated health systems. A competitive internal market for service provision could, if properly regulated to avoid 'cherry-picking' and other excesses, improve health system performance. The system which the Dutch introduced in 2006 is an intricate combination of market-based and state-regulated structures. It is too soon to say whether it has fulfilled its promises, but it hasn't thrown health care into an abyss of cut-throat profiteering (not yet, at any rate). This is because it still contains a strong component of state regulation. Unfortunately, I don't think the commercial interests that are behind the UK bill would ever settle for a comparable degree of regulation.

Nevertheless, the Dutch system does illustrate the limitations of marketisation when it comes to guaranteeing equity. My own specialisation is health care for migrants and ethnic minorities: for these groups, government policy used to be to promote equitable care provision by leading from the top. After the change of government in 2003, the new health minister announced that reducing disparities was no longer a responsibility of government, but would be left to the insurance companies, service providers and 'consumers' in consultation with each other. Unfortunately, minority 'consumers' - for well-known structural reasons - have a very weak influence on policy. As a result, the drive to improve care for migrants and ethnic minorities collapsed. What has now happened is that enterprising firms have set up categorical service providers to cater for dissatisfied minority patients, in effect introducing a segregated care system. Nobody wanted this, nobody even argues that it's a satisfactory solution to the problem, but this is what the free play of market forces has led to.

This story illustrates, to my mind, that equitable care provision can only be guaranteed by government - in the UK case, by ensuring that the Secretary of State for Health continues to be responsible for it. Equity is not an outcome that anyone should expect a market-based system to deliver. Can anyone explain how the opposite could be true?

Best wishes,
David
http://www.ercomer.eu/researchers-2/prof-dr-david-ingleby/ 

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: The Health Equity Network (HEN) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Namens Axel Kaehne
Verzonden: maandag 24 oktober 2011 11:50
Aan: [log in to unmask]
Onderwerp: Re: The Rio Political Declaration on Social Determinants of Health

Alex

International declarations can only provide mutually agreed goals and aims. HOW governments reach those is up to the nation states themselves and their parliaments. That is a critical aspect of democracy since otherwise internationally unaccountable organisations such as the UN could set government policy in individual countries. 

So, if you read it carefully you will notice that the passage does not say anything about HOW governments need to provide a quality health system. If it did it would make prescriptions that is left to democratically elected parliaments to determine. So, that's why there is no contradiction between the Rio Declaration and the Health and Social Care bill. Whether or not we agree with the content of the bill and its provisions is of course a different matter. 

Best wishes

Axel

On 23 Oct 2011, at 16:07, Alex Scott-Samuel wrote:


	I'd be grateful if you could tell me who, if anyone, signed this declaration on behalf of the UK Government. The declaration states that 'Good health requires a universal, comprehensive, equitable, effective, responsive and accessible quality health system'; but this is precisely what the Government's Health and Social Care Bill seeks explicitly to remove and to replace with one in which universality, comprehensiveness, accessibility and quality are determined by the vagaries of the market.
	
	Best wishes, Alex Scott-Samuel
	
	World Conference on Social Determinantds of Health
	Rio de Janeiro Brazil, October 21, 2011

	
	Available online at bit.ly/q5anfm <http://t.co/i5PE90sG>  

	The Rio Political Declaration on Social Determinants of Health expresses global political commitment for the implementation of a social determinants of health approach to reduce health inequities and to achieve other global priorities. It will help to build momentum within WHO Member States for the development of dedicated national action plans and strategies.

	 Process of development

	On 15 August 2011, the text was circulated to Geneva-based Permanent Missions of Member States. The first meeting of Member States, convened by the Government of Brazil, was held at WHO headquarters on 7 September, 2011. This was followed by a series of informal consultations attended by representatives of Permanent Missions. The text of the declaration was finalized during the conference in Rio de Janeiro on 19-21 October, 2011.

	https://www.twitter.com/eqpaho <https://www.twitter.com/eqpaho> 

	 
Dr Axel Kaehne
Welsh Centre for Learning Disabilities
School of Medicine
Heath Park
Cardiff
CF14 4XN
Phone 029 20 687 212
Fax 029 20 687 100
[log in to unmask]

http://medicine.cf.ac.uk/en/person/mr-axel-kaehne/

Read my blog at 
www.axel-kaehne.net

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager