Don’t privatise the National Heart Institute
The question to ask is whether there will be a net benefit to the public or Government from privatising IJN. If there is any reasonable doubt that there will be no net benefit, then the privatisation should simply not be undertaken.
IT was a wedding party at a five-star hotel in town. Amid all the celebrations, a middle-aged lady suddenly went short of breath, had chest pains and aching of the arms, the classic symptoms of an impending heart attack.
Someone thought of calling the National Heart Institute or IJN, its Malay acronym, an ambulance was there shortly and the patient delivered to the hospital. She had indeed had a heart attack. Her condition was stabilised.
Within a few days, a stent – a microstructure to hold up the arterial walls – had been put into the affected area through a procedure called angioplasty involving inserting a catheter through the major blood vessels to the heart. And the patient was as good as new – almost.
The total treatment cost – a paltry RM1 - because the husband of the lady was a government servant.
That’s one of many, many examples of those who have been helped by IJN, set up as a separate body from the Kuala Lumpur General Hospital in 1992, three years after then prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had a heart-bypass operation at the hospital.
IJN became a boon for countless heart patients – not just government servants and their dependents but also many from the private sector who came there for not only its courteous and polite service but also its competence and reasonable charges.
For many of them, and for large sections of the Malaysian public, the very idea of privatising IJN is shocking because charges will rise to astronomical levels.
The question to ask is whether there will be a net benefit to the public or Government from privatising IJN. If there is any reasonable doubt that there will be no net benefit, then the privatisation should simply not be undertaken.
Having a bypass at a private hospital is likely to be several times the cost if you had it at IJN and the care and competency is likely to be the same or even better at IJN, especially since the motive will not be mere profit.
Privatisation on the other hand is based purely on the profit motive and to extract for the investor the maximum possible return from the initial outlay. If the private sector can pay a price for IJN, yes, it would benefit the Government. But at what price?
Inevitably rates will go up. If government servants and dependents get free treatment, others will have to be charged more. The only way that profits can be increased substantially is to raise rates.
Look at every privatisation done in the country. Did any company bring down rates because they were more efficient? No.
No profit-motivated private sector organisation should be entrusted with the role of providing affordable healthcare to the public at large.
Let them cater to those who can afford to pay for the services and build up their own capability and service instead of usurping all that the Government has built at its own expense and effort over many years.
The IJN is a unique institution in the annals of government. It has been far more successful than most. It offers courteous and competent service at very reasonable cost and it is one of the best heart centres in the region. Why should the Government give it up?
There are some things that should not be up for sale at any price. Affordable health care for the general public is one of them.
IT was a wedding party at a five-star hotel in town. Amid all the celebrations, a middle-aged lady suddenly went short of breath, had chest pains and aching of the arms, the classic symptoms of an impending heart attack.
Someone thought of calling the National Heart Institute or IJN, its Malay acronym, an ambulance was there shortly and the patient delivered to the hospital. She had indeed had a heart attack. Her condition was stabilised.
Within a few days, a stent – a microstructure to hold up the arterial walls – had been put into the affected area through a procedure called angioplasty involving inserting a catheter through the major blood vessels to the heart. And the patient was as good as new – almost.
The total treatment cost – a paltry RM1 - because the husband of the lady was a government servant.
That’s one of many, many examples of those who have been helped by IJN, set up as a separate body from the Kuala Lumpur General Hospital in 1992, three years after then prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had a heart-bypass operation at the hospital.
IJN became a boon for countless heart patients – not just government servants and their dependents but also many from the private sector who came there for not only its courteous and polite service but also its competence and reasonable charges.
For many of them, and for large sections of the Malaysian public, the very idea of privatising IJN is shocking because charges will rise to astronomical levels.
The question to ask is whether there will be a net benefit to the public or Government from privatising IJN. If there is any reasonable doubt that there will be no net benefit, then the privatisation should simply not be undertaken.
Having a bypass at a private hospital is likely to be several times the cost if you had it at IJN and the care and competency is likely to be the same or even better at IJN, especially since the motive will not be mere profit.
Privatisation on the other hand is based purely on the profit motive and to extract for the investor the maximum possible return from the initial outlay. If the private sector can pay a price for IJN, yes, it would benefit the Government. But at what price?
Inevitably rates will go up. If government servants and dependents get free treatment, others will have to be charged more. The only way that profits can be increased substantially is to raise rates.
Look at every privatisation done in the country. Did any company bring down rates because they were more efficient? No.
No profit-motivated private sector organisation should be entrusted with the role of providing affordable healthcare to the public at large.
Let them cater to those who can afford to pay for the services and build up their own capability and service instead of usurping all that the Government has built at its own expense and effort over many years.
The IJN is a unique institution in the annals of government. It has been far more successful than most. It offers courteous and competent service at very reasonable cost and it is one of the best heart centres in the region. Why should the Government give it up?
There are some things that should not be up for sale at any price. Affordable health care for the general public is one of them.
MOHD ADHA MOHD ZAIN (ADHA ZAIN)
Blogger Informasi
