Advertisement

Personal Health Budgets for the UK NHS

A Revolution for the Patient?
  • Peter BeresfordEmail author
Editorial

Despite the efforts the UK government has made to get people to think of health and social care as one integrated policy, the two continue to be understood and treated very differently. Research repeatedly shows that the public has little grasp of social care. On the other hand, politicians know that voters are strongly committed to the UK NHS. Politicians know that a key way in which they will be judged at elections is on how well they are felt to have looked after the NHS. During the years of New Labour, NHS budgets have massively increased. In contrast, social care continues to be seriously underfunded. Social care includes some of the lowest paid public sector workers. Healthcare is home to some of the highest paid and highest status professionals.

Yet in 2008, there was a key coming together of these two major policies, health and social care, the full implications of which have yet to be recognized, let alone addressed. What brought it about was the introduction of a new idea to...

Notes

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this editorial. The author has no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this editorial.

References

  1. 1.
    Oliver M. Understanding disability: from theory to practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Darzi AW. High quality care for all: NHS next stage review final report. London: Department of Health, The Stationery Office, 2008 June [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_085825 [Accessed 2009 Mar26]
  3. 3.
    Glasby J. Individual budgets and the interface with health: a discussion paper. Birmingham: Health Management Services Centre, Birmingham University, 2008Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glasby J. Individual patient: background and frequently asked questions [HMSC policy paper 1]. Birmingham: Health Management Services Centre, Birmingham University, 2008 OctoberGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leece J, Bornat J, editors. Developments in direct payments. Bristol: Policy Press, 2006Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sweeney A, Beresford P, Falkner A, et al., editors. This is survivor research. Ross-on-Wye: PCCS Books, 2009Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glendinning C, Challis D, Fernández J, et al. Evaluation of the individual budgets pilot programme: final report. Individual Budgets Evaluation Network (IBSEN). York: Social Policy Research Unit, University of York, 2008 OctGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    CSCI. The state of social care in England 2006–07. London: Commission for Social Care Inspection, 2008Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    CSCI. Cutting the cake fairly: CSCI review of eligibility criteria for social care. London: Commission for Social Care Inspection, 2008Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Citizen ParticipationBrunel UniversityUxbridgeEngland

Personalised recommendations