Ncs3102 Primary Health Care: Role Assessment Answers

This assessment item focusses on understanding the power of the media in influencing health policy and politics.

Answer:

Introduction

Media is one of the stakeholders who play a very significant role in determining the stability of the healthcare sector. Over the years, media has been relied upon to educate, inform and sensitize the general public on matters of interest. In the healthcare sector, media has been relied upon to create awareness and educate the health practitioners as well as the rest of the Australian population on different matters regarding health. For example, when there is a disease outbreak, the media can be used to reach out to the society and tell the people whatever measures to take to prevent the spread of diseases. At the same time, when there is any health promotional campaign to be rolled out, it is the media that is used to access the target population. By discharging these roles, media has become an instrumental stakeholder in the creation of a healthy Australian society.  This paper critiques the role of media in healthcare. It alludes to the NSW Nurses and Midwives' Association (NSWNMA)’s article to explain how useful media can be in streamlining the healthcare policies in the country.

‘Public Hospital Privatization a Sad Day for NSW’ is a news article which was written and published by the NSWNMA on September 15, 2016. NSWNMA is an acronym for the New South Wales Nurses and Midwives’ Association. As its name suggests, NSWNMA is an umbrella association which brings together all the professional nurses and midwives in New South Wales. The union, whose membership is drawn from the nurses and midwives serving in all the private, public, disability, and aged-care sectors across the nation, has a responsibility of advocating for the interests of its members and protecting them from any act of violation by the employers and the government. The efforts of the union have made the nurses and midwives to have conducive working environments because their welfare is safeguarded. By 2015, the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF), Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), and Unions NSW-affiliated union had a total of 61,000 members. Since its establishment, the body has played a significant role in safeguarding the welfare of its members. Its contribution has also helped in improving the quality of healthcare services delivered to the public.

Analysis of the Article

In the article, ‘Public Hospital Privatization a Sad Day for NSW,’ the union was expressing its fury following the decision of the government of South Wales to privatize five hospitals: Maitland, Wyong, Bowral, Shellharbour, and Goulburn. According to the union, the privatization of the hospitals is not a good thing to in the current society. As a body concerned about the rights of the midwives and nurses, the union is concerned that the transfer of ownership of hospitals from the government to the private investors can negatively impact on the prosperity of the nursing and midwifery sector. According to the union, the privatization will, amongst other things, interfere with the stability of its members because they might lose their jobs. At the same time, the decision will affect the public which has been relying on the public for healthcare services (Kim, Lee, Chun & Benbasat 2014). Therefore, the union feels that such moves are disastrous because they will injure the prosperity of the healthcare sector. The union insists that the records have it that privatized healthcare facilities fail. So, before engaging in such acts, the government should seriously consult and seek for the opinion of all the concerned stakeholders such as the unions whose members are directly involved in the delivery of services to the public. This shows that the paper was overall concerned about refuting the decision of the government to privatize healthcare facilities.

A thorough skim through the paper reveals that the article is exclusively about privatization. The union expresses concerns that the government of South Wales is developing a tendency of privatization. However, the union feels that the privation of healthcare facilities is so bad and can be disastrous. The union fears that the practice will endanger the future of the midwives and nurses in the country.  This will happen because the union has a feeling that the new changes might render the nurses and midwives jobless because the new management can be tempted to lay-off all the existing staff and replace them with new ones (Hill, Jones & Schilling 2014). According to the union, there are higher chances of suffering because the new privatized entities will not be working towards accomplishing the similar goals which had been set by the government. Governments, all other world, always own healthcare services, not to make profit, but to create jobs and deliver healthcare services which can promote health equality and equity. However, all these, according to the union, might be lost. Unlike the government, private investors are not primarily concerned about the public. Its major concern is to make and optimize profit (Huarng & Ribeiro-Soriano 2014).

Having keenly gone through the article, I would like to boldly express that it is a well-written piece. It has fair arguments that depict the truth in the country. The paper is therefore suitable for the policy-makers, nurses, midwives, and the general public. Each of these people is targeted by the union because they are, in one way r the other, directly affected by the new changes. The policy-makers are targeted by the union in the article because it is them who are responsible for the formulation of all the policies which are implemented in the country. An appeal is made to the policy makers to be wary about such moves and be ready to involve the public in the process of making major decisions. As the topmost organ, the government should not work in isolation. Instead, it should be ready to cooperate with concerned stakeholders such as unions before making any serious changes in the organizations (Chhokar, Brodbeck & House 2013). Such collaborations can enable the government to get brilliant ideas which can enable it to make rational decisions to help in improving the quality of healthcare services in the country. However, the public, nurses and midwives are also targeted by the article because they should be sensitized and adequately informed on all the things that happen in the healthcare sector.  If they are properly informed, these stakeholders can be empowered to take appropriate actions such as appealing to the government to reconsider such decisions because they are not for common good.

The professional way in which the article is written demonstrates that it is a balanced piece of writing. It is fair as expected of such a critical article. It demonstrates how objective a media can be in addressing the issues of national concern. Although the union is concerned about the interests of its members, it wrote a paper which does not show any bias at all. All the points are objectively-presented in the article. Right from the beginning of the article, the author becomes clear on exactly what he wants. He begins by clearly-stating what the government has done (Getz & Page 2016). Then, the author goes ahead to objectively give his criticism for the action by explaining all disadvantages of privatization. All the points given by the author are right because they justify why privation of healthcare facilities should be resisted.  The arguments provided are reasonable because they are supported by sensible arguments. For example, to justify that privatization will result into massive failures; the author gives an example of the hospitals which have failed as a result of privatization (Baden & Higgs 2015). At the same time, the author shows the laxity of the government in the protection of the public health sector by giving an example of the enactment of anti-redundancy entitlement law in June 2016.According to this law, the  management of a privatized firm can lay-off employees if it necessary to do so. Meaning, the employees will be deprived of job security because they can be sacked at will so long as the organization has changed ownership to private investors. All these points are objectively explained in the paper without any form of bias.  

Personally, I am convinced. Having keenly read the article, I would like to point out that it is a good piece of writing. All the points explained by the author make sense to me. As a concerned citizen, I have always known that the government has an important role to play in the delivery of healthcare services. Although I acknowledge the important contributions of the private sector in healthcare delivery, it is my considered opinion that the government should not delegate all its responsibilities to the private sector. Private investors are people who are only concerned about profit (Frederickson & Ghere, 2013). Meaning, if hospitals are privatized, the public, and well as employees can suffer a great deal. These are the points which are explained in the paper.  The ideas expressed by Brett Holmes who is the NSWNMA’s Secretary General are right. The relinquishment of the responsibilities to the private sector shows that there is no accountability in the government (Killen, Jugdev, Drouin & Petit 2012). I believe that a concerned government does not necessarily have to transfer all its powers to the private sector, but can only provide the sector with all the necessary support. I agree in entirety with the article because it shows exactly what ails the private-public partnership. The situation can be worsened by the recently passed anti-redundancy-entitlement laws which gave the owners of privatized firms to lay-off redundant workers. This is a clear proof that a continued privation of health facilities will endanger the nurses and midwives whose interests are advocated for by NSWNMA.

The paper is convincing because it contains the information that was written from a perspective of the union. The information represents the perspective of the nurses, midwives, and the union members. However, it lacks the perspective of the general public and the policy-makers who are responsible for government policies. Therefore, I believe it means a lot to the union members and any other reader who is concerned about addressing the plights of the nurses, midwives, and the public who might be affected by the decision of the government to privatize healthcare facilities in the country. In my opinion, the article contains all the relevant information that should be included in such a critical paper. It does not only state the disadvantages, but enumerates all the challenges alongside the perceived benefits of privatization in the healthcare sector. Better still, it goes ahead to justify all the points by giving reasonable explanations, accurate examples and a historical background of the failed privatization attempts (Jerome 2013).  The article is written by a credible organization whose authority is not in doubt at all. All the evidence provided are from the union which has used its membership to analyze the situation.  Since they support the move, these people cannot support the view point of the union as expressed in the article. Nonetheless, the authors made a proper use of language and made efforts to ensure that the information is clear, precise, and written using an official and simple language which is very easy to understand. This makes the article to be a great one that should be read by anyone who wants to critique the role emerging practice of privatization in the health sector (Mellahi & Frynas, 2015).

Conclusion

In conclusion, ‘Public Hospital Privatization a Sad Day for NSW’ is an invaluable article which contains lots of informative information. The article provides important and accurate information about the role of government in the health sector. It is a balanced article which does an objective critique of the government. What makes it balanced is that it does not contain any bias at all. After highlighting the efforts of the government, it explains the inefficiencies in the government and how it has been using its powers to suppress the healthcare sector. The paper contains all the necessary information that should be known by the audience. It adequately demonstrates how protectionist the government has become for the private sector. Since it is written from the perspective of a trade union, it dwells so much on the injustices committed to the healthcare professionals particularly the nurses and midwives who have been deliberately excluded from the process of making major decisions no matter how much it affects their careers. All these make the article to be an insightful piece that should be read by anyone who is interested in knowing about the impacts of privatization in the healthcare sector.  

References

Baden, D., & Higgs, M., 2015, Challenging the perceived wisdom of management theories and practice. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(4), 539-555.

Chhokar, J. S., Brodbeck, F. C., & House, R. J. (Eds.). 2013, Culture and leadership across the world: The GLOBE book of in-depth studies of 25 societies. New York: Routledge.

Hill, C. W., Jones, G. R., & Schilling, M. A., 2014, Strategic management: theory: an integrated approach. Cengage Learning.

Frederickson, H.G. &Ghere, R.K., 2013, Ethics in public management, ME Sharpe: New York.

Getz, D. & Page, S.J. (2016). Event studies: Theory, research and policy for planned events. London: Routledge.

Huarng, K. H., & Ribeiro-Soriano, D. E., 2014, Developmental management: Theories, methods, and applications in entrepreneurship, innovation, and sensemaking. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 657-662.

Jerome, N., 2013, Application of the Maslow’s hierarchy of need theory; impacts and implications on organizational culture, human resource and employee’s performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(3), pp.39-45.

Kim, T.H., Lee, J.N., Chun, J.U. &Benbasat, I., 2014, Understanding the effect of knowledge management strategies on knowledge management performance: A contingency perspective. Information & management, 51(4), pp.398-416.

Killen, C.P., Jugdev, K., Drouin, N., & Petit, Y., 2012, Advancing project and portfolio management research: Applying strategic management theories. International Journal of Project Management, 30(5), 525-538.

McFarlin, D., & Sweeney, P.D. (2014). International Management: Strategic Opportunities & Cultural Challenges. Routledge.

Mellahi, K., &Frynas, G. (2015). Global strategic management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.