South Africa: Quality Of Care In The National Health Insurance Debate

Last Updated: 29 September 2011
Article by Neil Kirby

There is currently much debate about the implementation of a National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in South Africa. Media reports indicate that a tension exists between supporters and detractors of the NHIS. One of the primary tenets being used to support the introduction of a NHIS is the constitutional obligation of Government to provide access to healthcare services.

This debate arises, as of necessity some would say, as a result of the direction contained in section 27(1)(a) of the Constitution, which obliges Government to provide access to healthcare services. In a similar vein, and maybe as a forbear to a NHIS, the State has already, some would argue, met its obligation in section 27(3) of the Constitution: to provide all persons with emergency medical services.

The legislative support for this obligation, imposed upon the State by the Constitution, is set out in section 5 of the National Health Act No. 61 of 2003, which provides that no one may be refused emergency medical treatment.

Within the context of the current NHIS debate, the emphasis has clearly fallen on the manner in which a NHIS is to be constructed in order to provide as many people as possible with access to healthcare services. The access debate revolves primarily around the issue of what measures Government should implement in order to ensure that healthcare is accessible to all.

The concept of access to healthcare arguably requires that legislative measures be taken by Government to provide for procedures, administrative and bureaucratic infrastructure, and policies that are to be relied upon to provide people with access to healthcare services. Such policies, by way of example, may require:

  • an increase in the number of clinics that are available to people living in rural areas;
  • access to a primary healthcare provider;
  • the provision of cheaper medicines; and
  • the identification of diseases that affect more people and thus require more attention and appropriate responses from Government - especially diseases such as cholera, malaria, tuberculosis and HIV and AIDS.

The debate about access to healthcare services is certainly a debate that must be held by virtue of the constitutional directives campaigned by the Bill of Rights. This debate also finds a voice in our common law by virtue of judicial pronouncements by the Constitutional Court. These pronouncements are encapsulated in matters ranging from the provision of renal dialysis services in the Soobramoney v Minister of Health, KwaZulu- Natal 1997 (12) BCLR 1696 (CC) decision and the decisions concerning the provision of HIV treatment following legal action taken against the Department of Health by the Treatment Action Campaign in 2002.

But what of quality healthcare?

Quality of care as a separate component of a NHIS, however, stands as a secondary consideration when one is talking about a NHIS or even debating such a scheme.

Quality of care is more ethereal in nature. It is difficult to pin down or encapsulate eloquently in a sentence or two and so is largely ignored by legislators. There is great difficulty in defining what it is that defines quality healthcare - most commentators on the topic defer to the idea that quality of care is dependant on the emotional connection between an individual and his or her health service provider.

Quality is thus defined by the individual based on the outcome of the healthcare service that he or she receives: a good outcome normally indicates good quality care and a bad outcome indicates bad quality care.

This debate, on such terms, makes defining a generally accepted normative quality of care difficult if not impossible and certainly renders it controversial within the current debate of the access to healthcare – at least in the NHIS paradigm in which we currently find ourselves.

But is quality healthcare a priority?

In their book Redefining Healthcare: Creating Value-Based Competition on Results M E Porter and E O Teisberg (2006 at page 85) state that, "[t]he issues of safety and quality are valid and essential. It simply is not acceptable to have preventable medical errors as a leading cause of death. Information on quality and outcome is essential to any effort toward value improvement [in healthcare]... Moreover, and this is less understood, poor quality almost always raises costs through inefficiency, prolonging the need for care, and requiring remedial treatments or surgery".

They conclude on the topic (at page 88) that, "[t]he only truly effective way to address value in healthcare is to reward ends, or results, rather than means, such as processed steps. The relevant results can be measured only at the level of medical conditions and over the cycle of care, where healthcare value is determined for patients, not for a hospital or other provider entity overall. Guidelines are important to go to doctors and spread knowledge about best practices, but rewards for excellence must be tied to results, not compliance. Providers should have to compete for patients based on value and not be rewarded for delivering just acceptable care".

The debate concerning quality is certainly one that appears to be centred on whether or not care that is provided produces the results that are desirable but the question is desirable to patients or administrators or healthcare providers. Therefore quality appears to have a place in the debate.

Quality is especially important when one considers what social ends healthcare is designed to achieve within a democracy or, more particularly, what co-ordinated healthcare such as a NHIS is designed to achieve in the context of a South African democracy – one that is premised upon the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

In their book Social Justice: The Moral Foundations of Public Health and Health Policy (2006 at pages 81 to 84), M Powers and R Faden state usefully that "... insofar as a standard view of the moral justification or moral point of public health as emerged, it goes something like the following. Public health is the social institution charged with promoting human welfare by bringing about a certain kind of human good, the good of health. The moral foundation for public health thus rests on general obligations in beneficence to promote good or welfare. Depending on the interpretation, public health is further understood as having utilitarian commitments to bring about as much health as possible. Concerns about justice, like concerns about respect for individual liberties, are understood as ethical considerations external to the moral purpose of public health that served to balance the public health's single-minded function to produce the good of health with other, right making concerns".

Therefore, it appears that the arguments for access to healthcare, in so far as the public health goal is to be achieved optimally by the introduction of a NHIS, rest on notions of justice within a society. Arguably, within our society, justice is realised with regard to the successful implementation of the Bill of Rights – bearing in mind that the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, is a social contract amongst each citizen with each other and the citizenry of the Republic as a whole with its Government. Accordingly, the Bill of Rights may be the best place to start in relation to what quality of healthcare should be in our NHIS.

It is submitted that measuring quality of care in relation to outcomes is only one way of assessing whether or not healthcare or a NHIS meets the State's obligations, with reference to the terms of the Constitution. A more effective means may be to judge whether or not the NHIS, when it is finally implemented, gives rise to a situation in which those persons subject to the NHIS are treated in such a manner that their other rights in the Bill of Rights are respected within a democracy built on equality, freedom and dignity.

The Bill of Rights contains rights that may influence and inform the quality of care process. Such rights may include: the right to dignity; the right to life; the right to equality; the right to proper and procedurally fair administrative justice; and the right to information. These rights may collectively inform what it is that quality care consists of within the NHIS once it is established.

Certainly, pronouncements by our courts already indicate that a great deal of respect is to be accorded to the individual when making decisions concerning his or her healthcare, which is fundamentally a matter of self determination. For example, the choice whether or not to smoke, whether or not to abuse substances, whether or not to exercise, whether or not to modify or not modify dietary habits, whether or not to drive recklessly, or engage in potentially dangerous sports, whether or not to have an abortion, whether or not to change one's gender, whether or not to end one's life and the means that one elects to do so.

All of these matters indicate the individual's self determination with reference to the individual's rights to dignity, life, equality and self determination. The collective impact of these rights has never been assessed, to the writer's knowledge, within the context of how they would inform the process of determining whether or not quality care is available to an individual receiving or accessing such care in terms of a NHIS, but they are a powerful platform on which to champion quality care.

This debate will unfold properly, within the context of such a rights analysis, in due course. However, a decision concerning the right to life and the right to end one's life is instructive in such an instance. In the matter of Clarke v Hurst NO and Others 1992 (4) SA 630 (D), the High Court was faced with the question of whether or not criminal liability would be visited upon an individual for turning off life support machines.

In such an instance, the High Court decided that, with reference to the legal convictions of our community, it was appropriate to consider an individual's circumstances with reference to his or her quality of life and decide if such a quality would be maintained by artificial means. Following such an evaluation, the quality of the patient's life would determine whether or not it was appropriate to turn off artificial life support. Whilst the debate in this matter was about what was wrongful or reasonable, the debate was informed by an element of quality, which rested on an appreciation of the individual's rights.

The debate concerning quality of care and its role ultimately in a NHIS is one that should be concluded prior to the implementation of a NHIS. The role of quality in the ultimate deployment of a NHIS in the Republic cannot be underestimated and does, in fact, carry constitutional weight within the context of such a NHIS environment.

Certainly, South Africa may learn from the experience of other countries who have dealt with or who are dealing with the implementation of a NHIS. Quality of care issues have arisen in such jurisdictions, but post the implementation of such systems.

Government finds itself in a position where, taking from those lessons and with a keen eye on the Bill of Rights, it must take such measures to implement a NHIS that accords with its responsibility in section 27(1)(a) of the Constitution, but that does not lose sight of the rights that are enjoyed by every individual in every circumstance of his or her life including, but not limited to, the receipt of quality healthcare services within whatever NHIS context.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Werksmans Incorporated
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Werksmans Incorporated
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions