BMJ 1995;311:761-762 (23 September)

Editorials

Priorities and rationing: pragmatism or principles?

Time for Britain to follow the Netherlands, New Zealand, and Sweden's lead and get serious

There is always the danger of assuming that the NHS's problems are unique: that they reflect either the special characteristics of Britain's health care system or the government's niggardliness in funding it. The issue of priority setting--or, more emotively, rationing--is a case in point. This is not some peculiar British obsession. All health care systems have to grapple with the problem of how best to allocate scarce resources. The real difference is between how different health care systems have tried to address this issue: between those countries that, like Britain, tend to diffuse responsibility and those that have sought to develop a national framework for the decisions of health authorities and clinicians.

Britain's Department of Health issues an annual set of priorities, but these are largely a shopping list reflecting the department's current concerns. In . . . [Full text of this article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Hayden, G. F (1999). Alliteration in medicine: a puzzling profusion of p's. BMJ 319: 1605-1608 [Abstract] [Full text]  
Access all current jobs at BMJ Group
Whats new online at Student BMJ
Listen to the latest BMJ Interview