In five pages the National Health System of Great Britain is examine in terms of changes and government system overhauls. Four sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: D0_MTnhsrev.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
care. While private health care is available in places like Britain, it tends to be overpriced - although it is run more efficiently and effectively. As of now, Britains National
Health System (NHS) is a dinosaur; desired and successful at one time, but these days a throwback and one that needs reforms and overhauling.
Overall, Britains health care system tends to be an example of "triple nationalization) - in other words, the state funds it (through general taxation), makes executive decisions about
it and administers it (National Health Service: The English Patient, 2000). However, concerns about "winter shortages" in hospitals have sparked somewhat of a panic, which has caused the British government
to try to take steps to throw cash - and other methods - at the problem (Curing the NHS Ills, 1997). As a result, the debate over the viability of
the NHS as a sustainable tax-funded system versus a more private, market based enterprise has entered the picture (Royce, 2002). Historically, the
NHS came out of World War II, officially being launched during July 1948 (National Health Service: The English Patient, 2000). At the
time, war-torn Britain was used to rationing and poverty, and most of the population welcomed the idea of a national health service plan for everyone, whether rich or poor (National
Health Service: The English Patient, 2000). While Britons still support the idea that everyone should receive the same health care from the same provider, no matter what the economic status,
the views on what should be provided have changed (National Health Service: The English Patient, 2000). The underlying idea of national health