FROM WEDNESBURY UNREASONABLENESS TO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REASONABLENESS

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 642-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Wei L. Wang

AbstractOver the last decades, rationing of medical treatment in the National Health Service (NHS) has moved from implicit to being increasingly explicit about what is being denied and about the procedures and reasons for such decisions. This article argues that the courts have had an important role in this process. By applying a heightened scrutiny of rationing decisions, courts have forced health authorities to make better-informed decisions and to take procedural justice more seriously to comply with, respond to and avoid judicial review. The analysis in this article reveals that litigation has contributed to incremental, but significant and enduring, changes in a social policy. It also offers insights to the paradoxes of judicial accountability in health care policies.

1993 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 164-165
Author(s):  
Peter Urwin

We are now well into the second year of the separation of purchaser and provider functions in the National Health Service. District health authorities as purchasers of services are required to assess the health care needs of their population (NHS Management Executive, 1991a) and seek professional advice regarding both the need for, and the provision of, services. The NHS Management Executive acknowledges that local clinicians in provider units will continue to make a major contribution to this advice (NHS Management Executive, 1991b).


1988 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Mohan

In this paper I analyse the employment impact of current health-care policies in Britain. I draw on the typology developed by Massey and Meegan (1982) in which change in employment may be categorised into that caused by intensification, by rationalisation, and by technical change. I extend this typology to include restructuring, but argue that there are a number of qualitatively different applications of the notion of restructuring. It is argued that the present government have taken a number of measures to control the NHS (National Health Service) wages bill. These are outlined and it is shown that the major impact of these changes is qualitative, rather than quantitative: the key issue is less the impact on the total number of jobs available, but rather on the terms and conditions on which those jobs are offered.


2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 660-668 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Newdick

Most now recognize the inevitability of rationing in modern health care systems. The elastic nature of the concept of “health need,” our natural human sympathy for those in distress, the increased range of conditions for which treatment is available, the “greying” of the population; all expand demand for care in ways that exceed the supply of resources to provide it. UK governments, however, have found this truth difficult to present and have not encouraged open and candid public debate about choices in health care. Indeed, successive governments have presented the opposite view, that “if you are ill or injured there will be a national health service there to help; and access to it will be based on need and need alone.” And they have been rightly criticized for misleading the public and then blaming clinical and managerial staffin the National Health Service (NHS) when expectations have been disappointed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Triya Chakravorty

The United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) staff and students have been working tirelessly throughout the pandemic in a multitude of ways, including caring for patients, volunteering their time, or being involved in research and education. People of Asian origin make up 29.7% of the NHS medical workforce1. In recognition of South Asian Heritage Month, we asked our readers to nominate health care workers of South Asian origin who have demonstrated their tenacity, innovation, and excellence in recent months.


2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Simpson

The current National Health Service (NHS) approach to commissioning health services is in flux. The purchasing of care from providers by general practitioner fundholders (GPFHs) and health authorities has changed with the new White Papers. GPFHs no longer exist and the commissioning role is being handed over from health authorities to primary care groups (PCGs). An understanding of the reasons for change and current arrangements will aid the consultant psychiatrist in influencing this process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document