The purpose of the following discourse is to make a fruitful discussion about whether the NHS of Britain should be privatised or not. However, prior to inaugurate the distinct argument, it is required to mention that the labour government of the post-war period of 1948 has created the chain of NHS for gathering all the necessary medical options under one large organization for the betterment of the public. It is also required to note here that the fundamental motive of NHS has been to provide service of pharmacists, opticians, nurses, general doctors and dentists at free of cost at the time of delivery to the public. Most significantly, the constitution of NHS relies on the concept of clinical need and not on the individual’s capability to pay (Savage 2015). Therefore, it is understandable that the tendency to privatise NHS does not support the organization’s age-old pioneering view. However, it should be also considered that the aspect of private healthcare is not isolated by any public budget. More precisely, NHS’s ability to deliver comprehensive as well as affordable service to the public, can limit the organization’s credibility to provide excellent service to the public. Therefore, it can be said that public health care chains like NHS should be privatised and should not be limited by the budgets of the public as per the fact that without privatization, it would not be possible to implement expensive treatments and install up to date technological instruments (O’Dowd 2016). However, in this response, it should be also noted that NHS has earned its success for being an organization that provides cost effective as well as effective services to the audience. More precisely, it is to say that NHS has made been recognized as world’s most efficient health care organization that has lowest health care expenditure per capita. At the same time, it should be considered with utmost priority that private and market based organization in the premise of health care does not always ends up making fruitful outcomes. On the other hand, as per Verspohl (2016), privatisation escalates the notion of competition (Naguleswaran et al. 2015). Competition in the field of healthcare does not prove effective as competition evokes several situations where cost of the service starts to increase and providers most of the time get involved in making money due to which the standard of health care service suffer. It has been in several cases that privatisation paves way for competition, which increases fraud cases as evidence from the privatisation of the Dutch system in the recent times. However, it should be also taken into account that privatization would increase the rate of choices in future. More precisely, in today’s world, choice in every sector has become an integral part of the market system and more specifically to the competition. Therefore, if the organization would be able to implement varieties of services, it could improve its care outcomes (McKee 2014). On the other hand, there is the need to privatise NHS as per the fact that the need to have standard and affordable healthcare is increasing with each passing day. It has been identified that due to lack of space and proportionate service, many people use to wait for disappointing long hours to get service of NHS. Therefore, it is to say that if the organization would be privatised, it would become able to increase the proportion of its fund, which would help NHS to expand the sphere of its service. According to various surveys and researches made in this ground, more than 64% of the common people think that the service of NHS is getting worse. Henceforth, it is easy to contemplate that the privatisation of NHS is identified to a necessity in order to increase the fund (Greener, 2016). On the other hand, if the entire situation can be judged through the fundamental marketing opinion, then it can be said that with privatisation and an impressive fund, the organization would be able to satisfy the elite class who could afford the money to acquire the expensive service. Therefore, it would strengthen the organization’s brand awareness and brand loyalty. On the contrary, it is also fact to prioritize that expensive service with the act of privatising NHS would create negative impression among the middle class and lower middle class clients. Therefore it is understandable that the organization would gain brand loyalty among the elite class though at the same time, it would minimize the rate of brand loyalty as well as brand awareness among the common audience who fall under the level of middle class and lower middle. It has been criticised by several critics that with privatisation public organization like NHS could possibly increase the level of inequality and discrimination (Goffey et al. 2014). However, it has been also identified that with privatisation NHS would possibly have diseconomies of scale. Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind in this context that though it is a fact that with privatization there will be more funds to raise quality in health and social care sector does not depend on profit. It is a fact that privatisation would pave the way to find more chances to enhance the profit margin but it is a proved fact that profit orientation has not coherent relationship with quality of service (Crawford 2014). However, it is required to contemplate here that NHS has found the need to integrate its part from every independent sector, which is indicative of the fact that the organizational chain has become fragmented in a disappointing way. Therefore, they need monetary help at first. Henceforth, the requirement for privatisation could not be avoided. It is conclude finally after the brief discourse that NHS needs to be privatised though the fundamental characteristics of most of the private health care organizations should not be applied by the considered organization.
Crawford, S.M., 2014. NHS privatisation: a step too far. The Lancet Oncology, 15(12), p.e527.
Goffey, A., Pettinger, L. and Speed, E., 2014. Politics, policy and privatisation in the everyday experience of big data in the NHS. In Big Data? Qualitative Approaches to Digital Research (pp. 31-50).
Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Greener, I., 2016. An argument lost by both sides? The Parliamentary debate over the 2010 NHS White Paper. Dismantling the NHS?: Evaluating the Impact of Health Reforms, p.105.
McKee, M., 2014. Mutual ownership: privatisation under a different name?. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 349.
Naguleswaran, K., Tribedi, T., Fenn, J. and Patel, S.B., 2015. This house believes the NHS should be privatised—1st southwest medical debate. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 10(1), p.11.
O’Dowd, A., 2016. Doctors’ worry about NHS “privatisation” is growing, says BMA.Savage, J., 2015. EU agreement would limit scope for reversing NHS privatisation. Nursing Standard, 29(35), pp.28-28.
Verspohl, I., 2016. Privatisation and profitisation in health care. A comparative study of Sweden and the Netherlands. Social Cohesion and Development, 7(1).