Transfer of hospitals and "additional premises" to the state: questionable morality in the implementation of the National Health Service Act (1946)

将医院和“额外场所”移交给国家:在执行《国民健康服务法》(1946 年)时存在道德问题

阅读:1

Abstract

The National Health Service Act of 1946, pioneered by Aneurin Bevan, came into being on the "appointed day", 5 July 1948. Hospitals with their "additional premises" throughout Britain were "seized" by the state and incorporated into this vast socialist enterprise. While the majority of the population welcomed this new initiative in the creation of a welfare state, associated with medical care from cradle to grave, not all (especially members of various Hospital Boards of Management) were so enthusiastic. The hospitals for "incurables" (long stay patients) were unhappy and lost a vast proportion of their income owing to a great deal of procrastination; but most of them ultimately managed to escape nationalisation after a prolonged period of negotiation, by a claim that they were "homes" rather than "hospitals". The confiscation of property which had been built as a result of voluntary subscription was another huge and highly contentious matter, which has been highlighted in recent years. The future of the Seamen's Hospital Society's properties represents a good example of this.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。