British Government Policy to Address Health Inequalities

Since the early 1990s, many countries have introduced a wide range of policies to improve the sector of public health. In England, for instance, the government inquiry into health inequalities led by Sir Acheson Donald was commissioned to reassess the best policies and strategies that enhance future development in health. The main purpose of this report was to reduce health inequalities in the United Kingdom. The Acheson was the first decision made to improve quality health care in 1997. Studies show that, the inquiry’s report was the best recommendation made by the government to tackle the widespread of health inequalities in England (Media Group Limited 2013, p1). The report sought to describe the policies that foster health equality and examine the policies’ development on health performance and tax reform that would tremendously the health sector. Still, the report was to give the best recommendation that would assist in future policy making. The Acheson Inquiry aim was to highlight the extent through which dealing with health inequalities would become a major priority in the United Kingdom. The report’s major effects were that it promoted an environment that engendered policies and strategies that deal with health inequalities, introduced health inequalities to current policies in England, and acted as a reference manual that in future would help the health sector to carry out their assigned duties and responsibilities effectively (Royal College of General Practitioners 2012, p1).

Further, the report also helped the government to expound more on the strategy Saving Lives: Our Healthier nation (The Stationery Office, 1999) (Newchurch & Company 1998, p1). This was an action plan established to tackle poor health in England. It aimed to increase the health of every citizen in England. This policy established that, good health is important to all lives and thus should not be underestimated. Still, it also established that most people die from illness that are preventable such as obesity and heart diseases just to name a few. As discussed by Olsen (1999, p1), The White Paper created insights to the British government on how to promote healthier living lifestyles, save lives, and minimize health inequality. Since 1999, the government has put forward the most comprehensive plan that focus on dealing with the main killers that include heart diseases, stroke, mental innless, accidents, and cancer (Royal College of General Practitioners 2012, p1). The British Government has diligently worked hard to promote communities and people that work together to boost health. The government plan has established that people can significantly boost their own health, through better diet, physical exercises, and quitting smoking. As people take care of their well-being, the government is more likely to spend less on health care. The government has established that most people need to be informed about the benefits of living a healthy lifestyle. With this, the government has introduced programmes that help citizens to make best decisions that promote their well being and save resources allocated on treatment and medication. To achieve better health standards, the government has allocated a lot of resources that secure and promote a healthier population (Dranove 2003, p22). This research claims that, the government has been enacted policies that discourage smoking to deter poor health and emphasizing on quality health standards. In securing better health, the policy believes that the environmental, economic, and social factors are strong factors that affect the concept of quality health. In facts, the policy underline that people can make decisions about their health and this can make a big difference in improving health standards (Mental Health Foundation 2009, p1).

According to Mckie (1998, p2), the Acheson Inquiry enacted 39 recommendations and policies to tackle health inequalities. The Acheson inquiry recognized that dealing with health inequalities would require immediate actions to address all issues that hinder people to access adequate health care. In this case, the report introduced two key papers that were later framed by the government to deal with these challenges. The key papers include the Saving Lives and the (NHS) plan. The saving lives also known as known as healthier nation white paper was enacted in 1999 that aimed to save lives, promote a health living lifestyle, and reduce health inequality (Media Group Limited 2013, p1). This system recognized that health equalities would be achieved if governments would partner together with individuals and local communities to deal with issues of health. On the other hand, the NHS plan was established in 2000 with the need to tackle health inequalities in England. In brief, the NHS plan stressed on the importance of tackling health inequalities in a population. The plan emphasized the need to improve nutrition, reduce smoking, and boost child health. Despite the health white paper being on lead to address health equality issues, it has been criticised of being costly to maintain. It believed that, equity and excellence in health care regards the British government to allocate more resources to meet all population. The health white paper has been known to be expensive and much criticism has revolved here. To achieve the desired purpose, the British government would only succeed if it agreed to tackle on habits that promote unhealthy lifestyle. With this, the British government established the need to partner with other public agencies and services to cut the cost required to meet all population (Mckie 1998, p5).

The British government has worked hard to implement programs that encourage its population to improve on a proper diet, weigh control, reducing smoking, improved access to quality treatment, and effective screening services. The purpose of these actions was to promote a healthy living lifestyle (Faculty of Public Health 2010, p1). For the past years, the government has implemented various policies to deal and tackle health inequalities. According to Goddard (2008, p1), this is evident in the advancement of processes and systems at local and national levels. Specifically, it is evident in the two aspects for tackling health inequality as indicated in the agreement of PSAs and the Treasury’s spending review on health inequalities. In this context, most departments in the government have recognized the need of having new and existing policies to tackle the issue of health inequalities and the impact these policies can make in the health sector. In addition to these policies, the government has further identified the need for the better use of the existing evidence and information to improve health care delivery. Most significantly, the government has promoted an effective working environment where patients’ needs are met accordingly (Goddard 2008, p1).

As argued by Faculty of Public Health (2010, p1), the achievement of long-term benefits for reducing health inequalities obligates the incorporation of a wide range of policies in planning. Hence, the British government has diligently worked hard to ensure that there are appropriate processes and systems needed to support healthcare delivery. In this case, new processes and mechanisms have been introduced to support the implementation and formulation of policies to deal with health inequalities. There have been a wide range of performance and targets measures to address health inequalities. Mechanisms and policies have been enacted to make health care more affordable. Although the government has worked to ensure to enact based policies such as tax credits, challenges have emerged to measure the progress of health care policies. For instance, it has been difficult to observe the impacts of health particularly on the concepts that concern taxes. The main challenge has been whether increases taxes can deal with the issue of health inequalities. In this case, performance management has been enacted to ensure that the targets and objectives of health equality are set and met accordingly (Schyve 2009, p40).

Although much progress has been made to the Acheson inquiry, the study of Margolis (2008, p22) identified three major gaps. First, there have been no mechanisms to endorse development of policies to deal with health inequalities. Secondly, there has been a need of independent and evaluation of policies in terms of progress and their impact on the target group. Thirdly, there has been a strong need to conduct and organize research studies in regard to effective outcomes and interventions of health inequalities. In response to the mentioned challenges, Marmot (2009, p10) suggests the possible solutions to ensure that there is a progress made to tackle health inequalities. This research shows that, the responsibility of the inequalities and public health Task Forces could be examined and revised to promote ways that address health inequalities at both the local and central government level (Marmot 2009, p11).

When researchers talk about health inequalities, the differences are measured in terms of socioeconomic circumstances based on income, education, and housing tenure. Evidence on social exclusion has helped the British government to drive forward measures and policies that reduce health inequalities. In analysing the socioeconomic circumstances, the public health sector has generated two policies (Newchurch & Company 1999, p37). One that focuses on the poorest circumstances and another one that focuses on poorest health. The Social Exclusions policies have been successful in addressing health inequalities in UK. They have been adjusted to include systems and policies that tackle health inequalities with various programs at work such tax and benefit policies. To support planning, policy, and provisions, departments could be needed to share and monitor health inequalities. These inequalities in relation to social class, ethnic minorities, birth registration by parents with low incomes. However, actions should be taken to deal and address the limitations that emerge from target groups on health inequality. At this point, the great application on health inequalities would be achieved if only all groups are given adequate health care regardless of their social status, income, and race (Newchurch & Company 1999, p33).

The government have enacted various measures and policies to reduce health inequalities. First, the government has improved employment and educational opportunities for instance by initiating substantial investment in various programs to assist people into having lifelong learning. Additionally, the government has rebuilt local communities and promoted local strategic partnerships between non-government, NHS, and local government organizations. There have also been supporting groups that improve the social support of those that are less fortuned. This has provided further opportunities to offer direction to the government on the best services and programmes that can minimizes health inequalities in the nation. The government has work hard to tackle and deal with the following issues. These include deal with the major killers in the society such as accidents and terminable diseases, improve access to public facilities and services, improve the well-being of the less-fortune communities by improving housing and creating a safe and favourable environment. Much progress has been made to align policies in a way that with produce strong initiatives to address and tackle health inequalities (Great Britain, & Marmot 2006, p44).

In 2008, Professor Sir Marmot Michael was requested by the Secretary of State too Independent review to recommend the most effective strategies for minimizing health inequalities in England (Bc Pacific Salmon Forum 2009, p33). Marmot final report concluded that reducing health inequalities would regard the government to embrace the following actions and policy objectives. These include give every child the best health care, enable all adults, young people, and children to have control of their lives, create job opportunities, increase health standards for all, develop and create sustainable and healthy communities and places, and strengthen the impact of health prevention. In brief, the marmot review looked at the difference in the well-being of social groups and reflects how health equality would be demonstrated. In addressing about health inequalities, the review claimed that it was paramount to deter any condition that would reduce illness. Still, the review aimed to create a favourable environment where individuals can be accountable of their own lives. Since its establishment, the Marmot review has been a reminder to the British government on how it can address the economic and social cost of health inequalities. Typically, the Marmot review helps England to focus on providing a comprehensive strategy that would work hard towards improving social justice and health equity and further identify key areas that would contribute to the advancement of the health inequalities strategies. Despite its effectiveness in addressing health inequalities, it has been criticised for its inadequacy to address and deal with the ethnic dimensions of health inequality. The British government has begun to implement new strategies that address health inequalities and sustainable lifestyle. These actions include education, creating job opportunities, encouraging many people to take a healthy nutrition, and education people on how they can prevent various diseases such as diabetes (Bc Pacific Salmon Forum 2009, p37).

In general, the current coalition government policies have improved in the performance of the NHS through which there are no long waiting in hospitals. Patients have had great opportunities to access health care without waiting for long periods. Still, the government has implemented training programs to educate many people on the importance of taking a healthy diet and taking regular exercises. With this, people have established the importance of being accountable to their own lives. Since its enactment, the Acheson inquiry has helped England to address issues in regard to health inequalities. The British government has established that the inclusion of the health inequalities would require further advancements in all governmental departments. With this, the government has closely worked with other organisations such as United Nations to promote best living conditions and standards. To aid provision planning, and policy, departments have shared relevant data that relate to inequalities in access to health care services (Marmot 2009, p33). In essence, the health white Paper 2000 has enhanced much contribution to the health care delivery to the public. The main strategy has been promoting healthy lives and healthy people in England. To fully achieve these, the government has ensured that every individual understand his or her role in promote a healthy living standards (Marmot 2009, p35). However, it has been criticized of not fully meeting all population specifically those in rural population. Some people have not fully comprehended how they can live a healthy lifestyle. With this, the British government has implemented plans that focus on improving the health living of all populations such creating awareness on proper nutrition, importance of regular exercise, and promoting best living conditions.

Future public health delivery arrangements include improving on the NHS outcomes framework. This will include a set of national outcome goals and objectives that will cover three domains of health safety, quality, and patient experience. The NHS board will be accountable of healthcare delivery improvement in all population regardless of their race, education background, and social status. The public health sector aims to ensure that health care providers are equipped with skills and abilities that focus boosting health outcomes. The government will focus more on improving quality care available at an affordable cost. The government intends to improve health status in childhood and throughout adulthood in different areas within the country. The saving lives emphasize the need to deal with terminable diseases such as heart diseases, cancer, and Aids. At this point, the government intends to educate many on how they can improve their lifestyle through proper nutrition, reducing smoking, better detection of diseases, and weight control among others. In this context, mothers will be encouraged to take proper nutrition during pregnancy to reduce infant mortality (Marmot 2010, p22). Lastly, there are various initiatives that the government have put into place to deal with health inequalities. These include the Sure Start initiative that was announced in 1998 with an aim of tackling health inequalities among children. For the past years, this initiative has emphasized to improve childcare, family support, and early education. Additionally, Health Action Zones (HAZ) is an initiative that aimed to tackle health inequalities in UK. This initiative has created a strong ground for the government to promote health equality in all regions regardless of any social, racial, or education differences. The Sure Start and HAZ are hard to maintain in that the plans are expensive and costly. The programs involved require the British government to have adequate resources to improve the well-being of all populations.

Lastly, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) aims to develop 150 quality standards to improve the care that is reflected in financial incentives and commissioning contracts. The development of best practices will be enacted and framework extended to support quality health care. The vision of the government is to have a NHS that provides the best health care and reduces health inequalities (Bc Pacific Salmon Forum 2009, p55). Public health in England has been established in such a way that it protects and boost the nation’s health and reduce inequalities. The public health sector continue to progress to ensure that it is best placed to improve the public health and well-being. In evaluating about public health agenda in England, one would argue that the leadership team for public health in England has not been fully organised to meet the needs of all populations in England. The management team should ensure that health care is distributed equally to all populations regardless of any differences in race, education, or social status (Faculty of Public Health 2010, p1).

Thus far, this paper presents a research that highlight how British Government has addressed health inequalities for the past years. From the analysis, British government has been on the lead in ensuring that its citizens achieve adequate health care. In various ways, the government has ensured that every individual has access to health care regardless of his race, social status, and education background. First, the Acheson report 1998 was enacted to ensure that there were adequate policies to address health matters. The report recognized that solving health inequalities would oblige the government to have actions put into place to enhance the best access and utilization of medical services. The report comprised two key policy papers that were the saving lives and the NHS plan. These programs were enacted to promote health equality and deter and discrimination that may emerge when distributing health care. The British government has made commitment to deter health inequalities that will narrow the gap in health status during childhood and throughout adult life. Secondly, the health white papers have created a strong ground where everybody can access health care easily at an affordable cost. Marmot review has significantly helped the British government to address the economic and social cost of health inequalities. For future plans, the government intends to expound more on the NHS and Saving lives plan by allocating adequate resources that will meet the demands of medical care. From the ongoing discussion, it is obvious that British government is on lead to address various issues affecting most population such as health inequalities. The government has created a strong ground where the entire population can access adequate health care.

Bibliography

Bc Pacific Salmon Forum. 2009, Final report & recommendations to the Government of British Columbia, [Nanaimo, B.C.], BC Pacific Salmon Forum.

Dranove, D. 2003, What’s Your Life Worth?: Health Care Rationing– Who Lives? Who Dies? Who Decides? Upper Saddle River, Nj, Ft Prentice Hall.

Faculty of Public Health 2010, The UK’S Faculty of Public Health: Working to improve the Public’s health, Retrieved from http://www.fph.org.uk/public_health_white_paper

Goddard, M. K. 2008, Quality In And Equality Of Access To Healthcare Services In England, York, Uk, Centre For Health Economics, University Of York.

Great Britain, & Marmot, M. G. 2006, Fair society, healthy lives: the Marmot review, London, Strategic Review of Health Inequalities in England Post-2010.

Margolis, Simeon, M.D., Ph.D. 2008, Johns Hopkins White Papers: Prostate Disorders, Unit of Healthcare.

Marmot, M. 2009, Tackling health inequalities 10 years on : a review of developments in tackling health inequalities in England over the last 10 years, London, Great Britain Department of Health.

Marmot, M. G. 2009, Strategic review of health inequalities in England post-2010: Marmot review : first phase report, England, University College, London Global Health Equity Group.

Marmot, M. G. 2010, Fair society, healthy lives: the Marmot review ; strategic review of health inequalities in England post-2010, [London], Marmot Review.

Mckie, J. 1998, The Allocation Of Health Care Resources: An Ethical Evaluation Of The ‘Qaly’ Approach, Aldershot, England, Ashgate.

Media Group Limited 2013, Health White Paper: the details, Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7885875/Health-white-paper-the-details.html

Mental Health Foundation .2009, All Things Being Equal: Age Equality In Mental Health Care For Older People In England, Mental Health Foundation.

Newchurch & Company, 1998, English white paper: a third way for health. London, Newchurch & Co.

Newchurch & Company. 1999, Acute transformation: UK healthcare after the white papers, Newchurch & Company.

Olsen, K. 1999, Daily Life In 18th-Century England, Westport, Conn, Greenwood Press.

Royal College of General Practitioners 2012, Healthy Lives, Healthy People White Paper, Retrieved from http://www.rcgp.org.uk/policy/rcgp-policy-areas/healthy-lives-healthy-people-white-paper.aspx

Schyve, P. M. 2009, Leadership in healthcare organizations: a guide to Joint Commission leadership standards, a Governance Institute white paper, San Diego, Calif, Governance Institute.