Should a hospital have the interests of its patients or its shareholders at hear!


Question: Should a hospital have the interests of its patients or its shareholders at heart!?
Answers:
Well call me a bluff old socialist humanist hippy, but I think a hospital's sole concern should be with making people better!. (shrugs) I know, not very realistic or market-orientated is it, but that's the way I was raised :oDWww@Answer-Health@Com

Well your key word here is "should!." A hospital by definition SHOULD have the interests of its patients at heart!. But most share holders honestly are not in the health care industry and know very little about what it takes to run a health care facility!. It is NOT the same as a business though they are now being run as such!. Thus why the shareholders have such a say so in setting policy!.

But lets go back even further!. Insurance companies, in truth, have forced much of the policy that is in place nowadays!. It is a sad state of affairs when your treatment is decided by the insurance companies that know little of the ailments rather than by the doctors that have undergone years of study and training!.

"Should!?" or "Do!?" Hospitals should have the interests of its patients at heart!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. but obviously as we witness!.!.!.!.!.!.!. this is not always the case!.Www@Answer-Health@Com

Both requirements!.
The responsibilities to the shareholders is to optimise profits while maintaining minimum standard of patient care!. Minimum standard of patient must be defined independently ( by government body) and mechanisms must be in place to measure effectiveness!.
Usually the duty to the shareholders is to maximise profits however in healthcare this must be tempered with the requirement to meet patients' expectations and health standards that are comparable to its peers (both public and private healthcare)!.
How do they regenerate revenue !? how will the managed hospitals generate sufficient income to meet its financial commitments and make sufficient profit!.
Are the percentage of the profits to be created by cost reductions !? Do governments cap patients' fees !?
Labour relations will always be a problem ( lobbies would be doctors, administrators etc)!.
UK already implemented a shared services model for the hospitals that is beginning to be replicated in Canada!. This looks like the next arduous step and the governments move to private healthcare!.
Your question reflects the balance between share holder value and the social environmental responsibilities of public/large companies anyway currently under the way!.
This move will have patients and share holder responsibilities which clearly must be defined!.
Costs of the health centers should be controlled otherwise tax dollars risk to affect everybody's pocket anyway!. Non regulated hospitals have large unions , thus incurring lots of wastage financially and accountability of professionals is not easily accessed and firmly kept out of public and knowledge view and scrutiny!.

There are quite a lot of scandals within the healthcare system but those are never leaked to the media!.!.!.and the public is totally unaware also!.

PS: hospitals and the general health care system needs a STRONG governing body , unbiased and not involved in healthcare!. Hospitals, surgeons, etc do not disclose much and are very very protective of each other!. They are kind of "above the law"!. Try and find out a particular surgeon's record of success and failure!.!.!.!.!.!.it will be hard to access!. It is a community on itself and can be as faulty in the human field as well in the IT, finances, resources!.!.!.etc!. They just seem to get that extra privilege!.

Ex!. One VERY VERY known hospital in Toronto got 3 computers stolen with hundreds of patients' data, credit cards and SIN numbers (social security)!. A year ago, a big deal was made public about some companies about the same!. This time it was all hush hush!.

Surgeons, doctors etc as WELL as government bodies, which can be out of date, impact insurance companies!. Without wanting to go too much into detail : they are all with their hand in each other's pockets!.

Who now knows of any hospital with a free car park !? Ironic isn't it !? When you think about it!.!.!.

There is no doubt that privately funded hospitals offer much better health care and expectise: brain drain from other parts of the country or abroad!.

oh well!.!.could go on!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.but got to stop at some point!.

(Solution !?!? dunno!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.)Www@Answer-Health@Com

I can only see bad scenarios there, It would be far more beneficial to a private sector to pocket the government funding and produce sub standard services to the NHS hospitals while using the extra income to improve the service of the private hospitals and increase profits!.Www@Answer-Health@Com

Definitely the patients, as without the patients, the health service would fall apart and eventually cease to exist!!Www@Answer-Health@Com

Patients should come first but unfortunately that's not the case!.Www@Answer-Health@Com

Patients should come first as this is the reason we have a hospital and hopefully your shareholders would think the same but I don't think it happens that way !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.Www@Answer-Health@Com

Whatever the justifications, the interests of the patients should come first!.!.!.that's what hospitals are there for!!Www@Answer-Health@Com

Share holders, who cares bout patients they will die eventually anyway!.!.!. That's the way hospitals mostly work!.!.!.Www@Answer-Health@Com

I think they need to find a safe middle ground!.Www@Answer-Health@Com





The consumer health information on answer-health.com is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice or treatment for any medical conditions.
The answer content post by the user, if contains the copyright content please contact us, we will immediately remove it.
Copyright © 2007-2011 answer-health.com -   Terms of Use -   Contact us

Health Categories