Patients as consumers of health care in South Africa: the ethical and legal implications

BMC Medical Ethics

Keymanthri Moodley¹  Kirsten Rowe¹ 

[1]Centre for Medical Ethics and Law, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Tygerberg Campus, Cape Town, South Africa

关键词: South African;    Legal;    Ethical;    Rights;    Autonomy;    Commodification;    Consumerism;    Health care;    Consumers;    Patients;   

Others  :  799964
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6939-14-15

 received in 2012-07-03, accepted in 2013-03-14,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

South Africa currently has a pluralistic health care system with separate public and private sectors. It is, however, moving towards a socialised model with the introduction of National Health Insurance. The South African legislative environment has changed recently with the promulgation of the Consumer Protection Act and proposed amendments to the National Health Act. Patients can now be viewed as consumers from a legal perspective. This has various implications for health care systems, health care providers and the doctor-patient relationship.

Discussion

Calling a recipient of health care a ‘consumer’ as opposed to a ‘patient’ has distinct connotations and may result in differential behaviour. Labels reflect the ideals of the context in which they are used. Various models of the doctor-patient relationship exist and different metaphors have been used to describe it. Increasingly there are third parties involved within the doctor-patient relationship making it more difficult for the doctor to play the fiduciary role. In certain parts of the world, there has been a shift from a traditional paternalistic model to a consumerist model. The ethical implications of the commodification of health care are complex. As health care becomes a ‘product’ supplied by the health care ‘provider’, there is the risk that doctors will replace professional ethics with those of the marketplace. Health care is a universal human need and cannot be considered a mere commodity. In modern medical ethics, great emphasis is placed on the principle of respect for patient autonomy. Patients are now the ultimate decision-makers. The new Consumer Protection Act in South Africa applies to consumers and patients alike. It enforces strict liability for harm caused by goods and services. Everyone in the supply chain, including the doctor, can be held jointly and severally liable. This may lead to enormous challenges in health care delivery.

Summary

Viewing patients as consumers may be detrimental to the doctor-patient relationship. While it facilitates an emphasis on respect for patient autonomy, it inadvertently results in the commodification of health care. The new legislative environment in South Africa promotes the protection of patient rights. It may, however, contribute to increased medical litigation.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Rowe and Moodley; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Population Reference Bureau (PRB): Population and Economic Development 2012 Data Sheet. http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets.aspx webcite (accessed 22 February 2013)
• [2]World Bank: South Africa: Country Brief. http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/southafrica webcite (accessed 22 February 2013)
• [3]Van Rensburg HCJ: National health care systems: structure, types and dynamics. In Health and health care in South Africa. Edited by Van Rensburg HCJ. Van Schaik: Pretoria; 2004:1-44.
• [4]Ataguba JE, Akazilli J: Health care financing in South Africa: moving towards universal coverage. CME 2010, 28(2):74-78.
• [5]Republic of South Africa: National Health Act No 61 of 2003. Pretoria: Government Printer; 2003.
• [6]Reeder LG, American Sociological Association: The patient-client as a consumer: some observations on the changing professional-client relationship. J Heal Soc Behav 1972, 13(4):406-412.
• [7]Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Urowitz S, Sharpe N: Patient, consumer, client, or customer – What do people want to be called? Heal Expect 2005, 8:345-351.
• [8]Oxford dictionaries online. [Online]. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. Entries: Patient, Consumer[cited 28 April 2011]. Available from: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com webcite (accessed 22 February 2013)
• [9]United Nations: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr webcite (accessed 22 February 2013)
• [10]Benatar SR: Ethical challenges for health care in South Africa. In Health and health care in South Africa. Edited by Van Rensburg HCJ. Pretoria: Van Schaik; 2004:561-81.
• [11]Republic of South Africa: The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa No 108 of 1996. Pretoria: Government Printer; 1996.
• [12]Republic of South Africa, Department of Health: Establishment of the National Health Insurance advisory committee. Pretoria: Government Printer; 2009.
• [13]Moodley K: Individuals, society and the biomedical sciences. In Ethical health care. Edited by Illingworth P. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education; 2006:528-36.
• [14]Republic of South Africa: SA delegation supports call for development of policy framework for traditional medicine. http://www.doh.gov.za/show.php?id=360 webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [15]Republic of South Africa: National Health Insurance in South Africa – policy paper. Pretoria: Government Printer; Available from: http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=148470 webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [16]Mthembu J, African National Congress: The road to National Health Insurance. http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=6013 webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [17]ANC NEC Subcommittee on Education and Health: Education and health policy discussion document. http://www.anc.org.za/docs/discus/2012/educationr.pdf webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [18]Alder B, Porter M, Abraham C, van Teijlingen E: Psychology and sociology applied to medicine: second edition. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2004.
• [19]Rodwin MA: Strains in the fiduciary metaphor: divided physician loyalties and obligations in a changing health care system. American Journal of Law & Medicine 1995, 21(2&3):241-57.
• [20]Republic of South Africa, Department of Health: National Health Amendment Bill 24 of 2011. Pretoria: Government Printer; 2011. [Government Gazette No. 34739 of 8 November 2011]
• [21]Republic of South Africa, Department of Trade and Industry: Consumer Protection Act No 68 of 2008. Pretoria: Government Printer; 2008.
• [22]Plato: The Republic. The Project Gutenberg EBooks [Translated by Jowett B.] Available from: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1497/1497-h/1497-h.htm webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [23]Pellegrino ED: The commodification of medical and health care: the moral consequences of a paradigm shift from a professional to a market ethic. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 1999, 24(3):243-266.
• [24]Smith A: An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Available from: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [25]Smith A: The theory of moral sentiments. Available from: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smMS.html webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [26]Illingworth P: The ethical obligations of health care providers. In Ethical health care. Edited by Illingworth P. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education; 2006:269-86.
• [27]Gregg Bloche M: Trust and betrayal in the medical marketplace. Stanford Law Review 2002, 55(3):919-954.
• [28]Kant I: The critique of pure reason. In Penn State Electronic Classic Series. : Pennsylvania State University; [Translated by Meiklejohn JMD] Available from: http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/kant/Critique-Pure-Reason6x9.pdf webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [29]Beauchamp TL, Childress JF: Principles of biomedical ethics. 4th edition. New York: Oxford University Press; 1994.
• [30]Williams JR: World Medical Association (WMA) medical ethics manual. France: The World Medical Association; 2005.
• [31]Council for Medical Schemes Registrar and Chief Executive’s Address: The turning point in executing an agenda for change- using today’s lessons tomorrow. Sun City: The Board of Healthcare Funders of Southern Africa Conference; 2011. http://www.bhfglobal.com/files/bhf/Monwabisi_Gantsho.pdf webcite (accessed 28 February 2013)
• [32]Vogt T, SAMED CEO: Submission requesting exemption from certain provisions of the consumer protection Act. http://www.samed.org.za/uploads/SAMED%20Submission%20to%20NDOH%20re%20CPA%20Oct%202010.pdf webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [33]Klink E: Law in practice: CPA – knowing the rights of your patients. http://www.medicalchronicle.co.za/law-in-practice-cpa-knowing-the-rights-of-your-patients/ webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)
• [34]Howarth G, Davidow R: Don’t be consumed by new Act. Medical Protection Casebook 2010, 18(3):12-13.
• [35]Slabbert MN, Pepper MS: The Consumer Protection Act: No-fault liability of health care providers. SAMJ 2011, 101(11):800-801.
• [36]Gordon A: The perceived strict liability in terms of the Section 61 of the Consumer Protection Act. Pathology Forum 2013, 4(1):21-24.
• [37]Dhai A, Gardner J, Guidozzi Y, Howarth G, Vorster M: Medicine and the Law: vaginal deliveries – is there a need for documented consent? SAMJ 2011, 10(1):20-22.
• [38]Dinnie D: Consumer protection and the hospital patient relationship. http://proffessa.co.za/articles/how-will-the-new-consumer-protection-act-affect-your-medical-practice/ webcite (accessed 23 February 2013)