Muslim World Report

Healthcare as a Human Right in a Capitalist World

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 1, 2025 10:35 AM | 8 min read | 1671 words

TL;DR: Increasing dissatisfaction with India’s profit-driven healthcare system has sparked calls for socialism, reflecting a broader global movement towards universal healthcare that prioritizes equity and access as fundamental human rights.

The Situation: Healthcare as a Human Right

In India, a growing segment of the population is increasingly dissatisfied with the capitalist framework dominating the healthcare system. The recent request for recommendations for socialist neurologists encapsulates a significant shift in public sentiment toward medical care. This underscores widespread discontent with profit-driven healthcare, reinforced by:

  • Escalating treatment costs
  • Glaring inadequacies in access to quality care, particularly among marginalized communities (Rich et al., 1982).

The pervasive focus on profit margins over patient well-being has created a healthcare landscape that fails to uphold the fundamental principle that healthcare should be a human right.

This issue extends beyond the borders of India. Globally, capitalism has shaped healthcare systems in ways that prioritize the interests of pharmaceutical companies and private hospitals over the health needs of individuals. This has resulted in significant inequities (Wilkinson, 1997; Chari & Verdery, 2008). Evidence indicates that access to neurologists and other essential specialists in India is severely limited for those without financial means. This systematic marginalization raises critical questions about health equity and justice, highlighting the divide between:

  • The privileged who receive preferential treatment
  • The vast majority who are left vulnerable (Brown et al., 2005; Abubakar et al., 2022).

The call for socialism in medical practice is not an isolated phenomenon; it resonates with a larger, global movement advocating for universal healthcare systems that prioritize access, equity, and ethical practice. Such movements have gained traction in various contexts as citizens in numerous countries challenge profit-driven models and advocate for more equitable healthcare solutions that treat health as a public good rather than a commodity (Lehmann et al., 2008; Dake & van der Wielen, 2020). As patients express their desire for neurologists who embody socialist ideals, this reflects their yearning for equitable treatment and signals a potential movement toward systemic change.

The implications of this shift are profound. A healthcare system centered around socialist values could foster:

  • Public policies mandating minimum standards of care
  • Equitable access to specialists
  • Focus on preventative measures

Such an evolution could redefine healthcare delivery, positioning it as a public good rather than a private commodity (Lehmann et al., 2008). The emerging discourse surrounding socialism in neurology and healthcare warrants deep examination for its potential to influence broader societal changes, potentially inspiring similar movements across health, education, and social welfare sectors globally (Wedow & MacCannell, 1977; Macaia & Velez Lapão, 2017).

What If Socialist Neurologists Gain Popularity?

If socialist neurologists gained traction in India, it could herald a transformative shift in the healthcare landscape. Such professionals would advocate for:

  • Patient-centered care
  • Emphasizing ethical practices over profit margins

This shift could lead to a more equitable distribution of healthcare resources, ensuring that all segments of the population, irrespective of economic status, have access to necessary neurological treatments (Kościańska, 2014). The emergence of a network of socialist neurologists may challenge the existing hierarchy within the medical community, promoting collaboration over competition and enhancing the quality of care through shared knowledge and resources.

In the long run, this movement could catalyze political change, as a rising public demand for ethical medical practices pressures policymakers to enact reforms prioritizing universal healthcare access. This could translate into policies that limit the sway of profit-driven entities in healthcare, leading to a more public-centric model of care that addresses the needs of all citizens (Marelli et al., 2007; López García & Orraca Romano, 2018).

What If Capitalist Models Dominate Healthcare?

Conversely, if capitalist models continue to dominate the healthcare landscape, the consequences could be dire. The relentless prioritization of profit may exacerbate existing inequalities, particularly in underserved rural areas, where access to specialists like neurologists is already constrained (Sackett & Wennberg, 1997). Patients may face:

  • Exorbitant out-of-pocket expenses
  • Poorer health outcomes

Under a capitalist model, the focus on research may skew toward profitable treatments at the expense of holistic and preventative measures, creating a healthcare system that neglects the comprehensive understanding of health and wellness (Gordon, 2003; Fullman et al., 2018).

The persistence of such a model would entrench a cycle of inadequacy and inefficiency, undermining the fundamental necessity for a just healthcare system. As healthcare costs soar, many individuals could forgo essential treatments, leading to a broader deterioration of public health and well-being (Yuan et al., 2015; Dake & van der Wielen, 2020).

What If a Hybrid Model Emerges?

Should a hybrid model, melding elements of socialism and capitalism, emerge, it could represent a pragmatic approach to addressing the challenges faced by the current healthcare system. This model might allow for regulations ensuring minimum standards of care while permitting private entities to operate. Such a framework could:

  • Enhance accountability among healthcare providers
  • Mandate that all patients receive a baseline level of neurological care

This would bridge the divide between different socioeconomic classes (Widdifield et al., 2014; Fun et al., 2019).

However, the success of a hybrid model would depend heavily on active civic engagement and robust policy frameworks designed to safeguard healthcare as a public good. If not managed carefully, the profit motive could infiltrate the system, undermining the equity principles that a hybrid structure aims to uphold (Hepburn et al., 2020; Kościańska, 2014).

Strategic Maneuvers

Given the current state of discontent within India’s healthcare system, various stakeholders stand at a pivotal crossroads, each with unique opportunities to influence medical practice and policy.

For Patients and Advocacy Groups

Patients and advocacy groups must mobilize to express their needs for a healthcare system that prioritizes ethical treatment over profit. Key actions include:

  • Organizing forums
  • Conducting awareness campaigns
  • Leveraging social media to amplify their voices

By sharing personal stories and rallying community support, these groups can advocate for reforms that align with socialist principles, such as universal healthcare access and comprehensive mental health support (Bakker, 2007; Moodley et al., 2021).

Moreover, these groups can forge coalitions with socialist medical professionals to enhance visibility for those prioritizing patient welfare. By partnering with political allies, advocacy organizations can engage in lobbying efforts that compel legislators to enact policies promoting equitable healthcare access.

For Medical Professionals

Medical professionals—especially those who espouse socialist values—must act as vocal advocates for a reorientation of the healthcare system. They can push for:

  • Establishing collaborative networks among specialists to share knowledge and resources
  • Enhancing patient care while diminishing the profit motive

Workshops, public forums, and participation in professional organizations dedicated to ethical medical practice can strengthen their impact (Van der Waldt et al., 2008; Damas Macaia & Velez Lapão, 2017).

Additionally, forming alliances with patient advocacy groups will amplify the call for a healthcare model that prioritizes accessibility, fostering a broader movement toward systemic change.

For Policymakers

Policymakers must prioritize healthcare reform as a critical issue. They can introduce legislation aimed at enhancing public healthcare provisions, ensuring all citizens have access to necessary services. Key considerations include:

  • Exploring financing models that de-emphasize profit motives while maintaining quality care (López García & Orraca Romano, 2018; Fun et al., 2019).

Engaging healthcare professionals, advocacy groups, and the public will enable the gathering of input on necessary reforms. Policymakers might also consider pilot programs that incorporate socialist principles into the healthcare system, evaluating their effectiveness to inform future policies.

In conclusion, the pressing call for a shift toward socialist values within neurology and, broadly, the healthcare system reflects a critical juncture. The pathways taken by patients, medical professionals, and policymakers will determine whether India can overcome existing systemic inequities and foster a healthcare environment built on dignity, accessibility, and ethical responsibility.

References

  1. Abubakar, I., Dalglish, S. L., Angell, B., et al. (2022). The Lancet Nigeria Commission: investing in health and the future of the nation. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)02488-0
  2. Bakker, I. (2007). Social Reproduction and the Constitution of a Gendered Political Economy. New Political Economy, 12(4), 503-519. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563460701661561
  3. Brown, T. M., Cueto, M., & Fee, E. (2005). The World Health Organization and the Transition From “International” to “Global” Public Health. American Journal of Public Health, 95(1), 62-71. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2004.050831
  4. Chari, S., & Verdery, K. (2008). Thinking between the Posts: Postcolonialism, Postsocialism, and Ethnography after the Cold War. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 50(1), 93-122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417509000024
  5. Dake, F. A. A., & van der Wielen, N. (2020). Towards universal access to healthcare for older adults: an assessment of the old-age exemption policy under Ghana’s National Health Insurance Scheme. International Journal for Equity in Health, 19(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-020-1156-2
  6. Fun, W. H., Sararaks, S., Tan, E. H., et al. (2019). Research funding impact and priority setting – advancing universal access and quality healthcare research in Malaysia. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4072-7
  7. Gordon, L. (2003). The moral property of women: a history of birth control politics in America. Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.40-6114
  8. Hepburn, C., O’Callaghan, B., Stern, N., et al. (2020). Will COVID-19 fiscal recovery packages accelerate or retard progress on climate change? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 36(Supplement_1), S359-S377. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/graa015
  9. Lehmann, U., Dieleman, M., & Martineau, T. (2008). Staffing remote rural areas in middle- and low-income countries: A literature review of attraction and retention. BMC Health Services Research, 8(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-19
  10. López García, A. I., & Orraca Romano, P. P. (2018). International migration and universal healthcare access: evidence from Mexico’s ‘Seguro Popular’. Oxford Development Studies, 46(4), 567-582. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600818.2018.1527896
  11. Marelli, A., Mackie, A. S., Ionescu-Ittu, R., et al. (2007). Congenital Heart Disease in the General Population. Circulation, 115(2), 163-172. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.106.627224
  12. Rich, H., & Parkin, F. (1982). Marxism and Class Theory: A Bourgeois Critique. The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 7(1), 19-48. https://doi.org/10.2307/3340555
  13. Widdifield, J., Paterson, J. M., Bernatsky, S., et al. (2014). Access to rheumatologists among patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis in a Canadian universal public healthcare system. BMJ Open, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003888
  14. Wilkinson, R. G. (1997). Socioeconomic determinants of health: Health inequalities: relative or absolute material standards? BMJ, 314(7080), 591-595. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7080.591
  15. Yuan, G., Zheng, N., Yu, Q., et al. (2015). Performing the socialist core values in the cultural inheritance and innovation of traditional Chinese medicine. Traditional Chinese Medicine, 5(7), 102-107. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-4246.2015.07.002
← Prev Next →