Skip to main content

Welfare State ...No Thank You

A welfare state is an ideal state model where the welfare of citizens, economic and social, is provided for by a state that not only assumes this responsibility but defends its exclusive right in doing so (although it may share it with other independent institutions). The objective is social protection…a guarantee of conservation of human dignity, fair treatment of citizens and the effort to solve their ordeals in an efficient and effective manner. The developed world has achieved perfection in its design and implementation of such a state, whilst the developing world (or part of it) is improving its systems and institutions for that end. A state where people’s needs are met, where health, education and decent living are responsibilities that the state assumes in full accord with its citizens is the objective. A culture of well-being is the supreme goal.  
However, the utopian scenario is, well, utopian. Perfection in a public administration is an unrealistic (and quite arrogant) concept. Each system has its flaws and defauxs; even those designed with the best intention and good will have their share of cons. For instance, a country as developed and the USA where the defence of human dignity and protection of citizens’ well-being are founding pillars has its share of mistakes in its understanding and implementation of its welfare state model. Let us take healthcare as an example, which failed miserably and had to be rescued by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (AKA Obamacare) with the ambitious goal of enrolling 6 million people into private health care plans via the Affordable Care Act. The goal was ambitious but was met as 7 million people enrolled for private coverage. The new law, notedthe Los Angeles Times, "has spurred the largest expansion in health coverage in America in half a century." So this affordable health insurance should solve an important problem in the US society, even if it means that citizens have to pay from their own pockets to ensure receiving tis vital service. A country that spends trillions on weapons is asking its citizens to enrol in private health schemes.  Where welfare in that is, I am not quite sure.


    This Act would have appalled and caused mass demonstrations in European countries which frowned upon such a solution. Let’s take Spain for example, an excellent model of supreme health services, where citizens, foreigners, tourists and illegal immigrants all have access to free, immediate and excellent health services. Retired European senior citizens flee to sunny Spain feeling confident that they would be in safe hands. They know that they will be taken care of without any discrimination or additional payments. The health system is very well designed and transparent, where citizens are assigned to a health centre and a set of doctors to consult when in need with zero charge. That is indeed a state that cares about the wellbeing of its citizens, as no one would worry about being unattended in times of need. Or is that so? The problem with a highly organized and regulated system is that it tends to kill the human and social aspect. As a patient you become a number…that number gets you to that only hospital, to that only doctor and to that only appointment. You can’t choose your healthcare practitioner, nor can you tailor your appointments to your needs, nor can you establish a personal relation with any of the staff. You are identified by an ID that dictates your future when it comes to health issues and how they are addressed. You don’t exist outside that number. That sense of security suddenly fades in a moment of emergency or illogical and inexplicable worry. The system does not identify worry as a reason to access such services. Surprisingly, a non-welfare state offers –sometimes- a relief dose much needed in these advanced systems. Let us take Jordan as an example, a country that does not enjoy an efficient healthcare service, but is one where one can feel secure nonetheless. You do exist outside your ID number. A telephone call can solve a problem or push a date back. Logic, compassion and common sense are not limited by bureaucracy and systems. Your confidence stems not from the quality of the system but the quality of the staffs’ character and morals. The social ties and cultural background in this county, as may be in other countries I assume, are a solid rock to many…a safe place to fall back on. Welfare, in my opinion, is a sense of security, confidence that when in need someone will help in a personalized manner. It is not paying little money in a private health scheme with a fancy name, neither is it a blind treatment of ailments in a manner void of any compassion or interest. It is indeed a prompt response, a flexible attitude and a personalized treatment. To conclude, welfare means different things to different people and different nations. My personal understanding of it has been strengthened and rooted thanks to my experience with Jordanian healthcare. Not a welfare state perhaps, but one of welfare health providers.

Comments

  1. Great article Dina. Brilliant as you always are. Welfare wont be ideal unless you improve the role of state (authorities), place (hospitals,clinics...) & providers (medical staff). All that should interact in a flexible way with patients (medical seekers). Integrated system. My relation with my patient doesnt end once he /she closes the door saying goodbye! It is a life long relation that i'd be proud of.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Just as Orwell Said

         George Orwell said in his famous book 1984 that “first they steal the words, then they steal the meaning”, accurately foreseeing the political actions of world leaders and their manipulation of public opinion. His words are ever so precise once one examines the vocabulary applied by a number of world leaders when describing the policies and regimes of troubling countries: axis of evil, war on terror, terrorist killers, harbourers of fundamentalism etc. Ironic it is to see how those who were once described to have been allies with Satan himself seem to show good will in a matter of very few years. Iran is one very good example of this. The Persian nation has come out as a winner in the Geneva talks that were held in October, where not only did it get applauded for the concessions it offered, but it also ensured the west’s acceptance of its regional weight. Everyone seems to be more relaxed after the negotiations and ...

Kaftar

Muaawiya Bin Abi Sufyan was the first Umayyad Caliph, who ruled as a just and jovial leader until his death in 683 AD. Known for his sense of humour and his love for women, Abi Sufyan was famous for a story that took place in his own harem. While escorting a woman for the Khorasan region in modern day Iran, a beautiful woman entered the harem and mesmerised the Leader of All Believers. With his pride in his manhood and prowess in the bed arena, Abi Sufyan did not hesitate to engage in a brazen and manly sexual act in front of the Khorasani woman, who was patiently waiting for her turn. After he was done, he turned victoriously to his first concubine and asked her how to say ‘lion' in Persian - in a direct analogy to his sexual performance.  The Khorasani woman, unamused, told him slyly, that lion is kaftar in Persian. The Caliph went back to his Court ever so jubilant and told his subjects – repeatedly – that he was one lucky kaftar. His...

Pan-Arabism vs. Middle Easternism?

             A rab Nationalism, a romantic concept that moved poets to write ballads, intellectuals to preach volumes, activists to passionately organize and the masses to cheer freedom. A concept introduced by students at the American University of Beirut in the last phases of the ageing Ottoman Empire and studied in secret societies. This concept developed and led, under western planning, to the Great Arab Revolt in 1916. The slogans of Arab revival and freedom from Ottoman tyranny swept the Arab nations, where hopes of independence and self-rule were promised by the restoration of Arab control over the area. Then problems arose. Who are Arabs? What is an Aran nation? How does it extend geographically? Is it an area that encompasses people who speak the same language and share the same history? If so, why did the Lebanese Maronites reject the concept of Arab nationalism and insist on a Lebanese identity? Why did the Egyptians hesitate be...