Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T18:46:08.891Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Co-payments in the NHS: an analysis of the normative arguments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2010

Albert Weale  and
Sarah Clark
Albert Weale
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Government, University of Essex, UK
Sarah Clark*
Affiliation:
Research Officer, Department of Government, University of Essex, UK
*
Correspondence to: Sarah Clark, Department of Government, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK. Email: slclard@essex.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During 2008, some forms of patient co-payments – in particular, patients paying privately for additional medicines as part of an episode of care in the National Health Service – became controversial in political and policy terms in the UK. In response, the UK Government published a report, the Richards’ Review, examining the issues. Richards offered a particular policy solution, but also touched on fundamental principles of social value. Using the methods of normative policy analysis, we seek to understand these principles of social value, accepting the Richards’ framework according to which the relevant arguments can be grouped under the broad headings of equity and autonomy. None of the arguments on either side are decisive, and, in part, the policy decision turns on uncertain empirical conjectures.

Type
Articles
Information
Health Economics, Policy and Law , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 225 - 246
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Appleby, J. (2008), ‘How to run a fair NHS’, The Guardian, 19 June 2008.Google Scholar
Baron, J. (2008), in HC Westminster Hall Debate, Hansard ‘NHS co-payments: Mrs O’Boyle’, 10 June 2008 at Column 51.Google Scholar
Barry, B. (1965), Political Argument, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bloor, K. (2008), ‘Should patients be able to pay top-up fees to receive the treatment they want? No’, British Medical Journal, 336: 1105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dworkin, R. (1977), Taking Rights Seriously, London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Dworkin, R. (2000), ‘Justice and the High Cost of Health’, in R. Dworkin (ed.), Sovereign Virtue, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press: 307–319.Google Scholar
Feinberg, J. (1986), The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law: Harm to Self, Volume 3, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Finlay, I.Crisp, N. (2008), ‘Drugs for cancer and copayments’, British Medical Journal, 337: 527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foot, M. (1975), Aneurin Bevan 1945–1960, Frogmore, St Albans: Paladin.Google Scholar
Goodin, R. E. (1995), Utilitarianism as a Public Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1951), ‘The Ascription of Responsibility and Rights’, in A. G. N. Flew (ed.), Logic and Language: First Series, Oxford: Blackwell: 145–166.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1955), ‘Are there any natural rights?’, Philosophical Review, 64: 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Health Committee (2008), ‘Top-Up Fees’, Fourth Report, Session 2008–2009, The Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Klein, R. (2006), The New Politics of the NHS, Oxford: Radcliffe.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1861), ‘Utilitarianism’, reprinted in J. Gray (ed.), John Stuart Mill On Liberty and Other Essays, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991: pp. 129–201.Google Scholar
O’Neill, O. (2002), Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. (1996), Political Liberalism, revised edition, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1999), A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, M. (2008), Improving Access to Medicines for NHS Patients: A Report to the Secretary of State for Health, http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_089927 [3 April 2009].Google Scholar
Richards, C., Dingwall, R.Watson, A. (2001), ‘Should NHS patients be allowed to contribute extra to their care?’, British Medical Journal, 323: 563–565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal Commission on the National Health Service (1979), Report, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. (1891), The Elements of Politics, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sikora, K. (2007), ‘Insurance policy promises to supply the drugs NHS will not pay for’, The Times, 25 April 2007.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H.Sunstein, C. R. (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness, London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Thornton, D. (2008), in House of Lords debate, Hansard ‘NHS: Private Patients’, 21 May 2008 at Column 1466.Google Scholar
Ware, A. (1978), The Logic of Party Democracy, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Weale, A. (1978), Equality and Social Policy, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Weale, A. (1983), Political Theory and Social Policy, London and Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weale, A. (1998), ‘Rationing health care: a logical solution to an inconsistent triad’ (editorial), British Medical Journal, 316: 410, 7 February 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, C. (1988), The Health Services since the War: Volume I, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Williams, B. (1962), ‘The Idea of Equality’, in P. Laslett and W. G. Runciman (eds), Philosophy, Politics and Society (second series), Oxford: Basil Blackwell: 110–131.Google Scholar