Journal of health politics, policy and law
-
J Health Polit Policy Law · Feb 1997
Historical ArticleDoctors and corporatist politics: the case of the Mexican medical profession.
This study advances our understanding of the relationship between the state and the medical profession in countries where health care services are used as instruments of economic and political control. As a general argument, we maintain that the corporatist nature of the Mexican state impedes the medical profession from achieving autonomy and control over its professional activities. In contraposition to medical professions in developed societies, the nature of the Mexican profession is shaped by state policies and by its reiterated efforts to act independently of the state's tutelage. ⋯ The result is a highly fragmented and disenfranchised medical profession with dissimilar political, professional, personal, and academic aims. In the final analysis, the interests of the corporatist Mexican state prevail over the interests of the groups, including doctors. The evisceration of the medical corps by the Mexican state results in a profession with low salaries, higher rates of unemployment, atomization in terms of political representation, and heavily co-opted medical organizations that seem to neglect the overwhelming health care needs of the Mexican people.
-
There are two prominent trends in health care today: first, increasing demands for accountabilty, and second, increasing provision of care through managed care organizations. These trends promote the question: What form of account-ability is appropriate to managed care plans? Accountability is the process by which a party justifies its actions and policies. Components of accountability include parties that can be held or hold others accountable, domains and content areas being assessed, and procedures of assessment. ⋯ The political model is the model we should endorse. Its disadvantages can be minimized by proper institutional design. In addition, recent research on managed care plans suggests that the political model may be the best for a competitive marketplace because it can ensure that tough allocation decisions are addressed and improve health through changes in nonmedical aspects of community life.