Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.50
Title: National Health Service Principles as Experienced by Vulnerable London Migrants in "Austerity Britain": A Qualitative Study of Rights, Entitlements, and Civil-Society Advocacy
Authors: Rafighi, Elham
Poduval, Shoba
Legido-Quigley, Helena 
Howard, Natasha 
Keywords: Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Health Care Sciences & Services
Health Policy & Services
Migrant Health
National Health Service (NHS)
England
London
Austerity
CARE
MIGRATION
ACCESS
INSIGHTS
REFUGEES
Issue Date: 1-Oct-2016
Publisher: KERMAN UNIV MEDICAL SCIENCES
Citation: Rafighi, Elham, Poduval, Shoba, Legido-Quigley, Helena, Howard, Natasha (2016-10-01). National Health Service Principles as Experienced by Vulnerable London Migrants in "Austerity Britain": A Qualitative Study of Rights, Entitlements, and Civil-Society Advocacy. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT 5 (10) : 589-597. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.50
Abstract: Background: Recent British National Health Service (NHS) reforms, in response to austerity and alleged ‘health tourism,' could impose additional barriers to healthcare access for non-European Economic Area (EEA) migrants. This study explores policy reform challenges and implications, using excerpts from the perspectives of non-EEA migrants and health advocates in London. Methods: A qualitative study design was selected. Data were collected through document review and 22 in-depth interviews with non-EEA migrants and civil-society organisation representatives. Data were analysed thematically using the NHS principles. Results: The experiences of those ‘vulnerable migrants’ (ie, defined as adult non-EEA asylum-seekers, refugees, undocumented, low-skilled, and trafficked migrants susceptible to marginalised healthcare access) able to access health services were positive, with healthcare professionals generally demonstrating caring attitudes. However, general confusion existed about entitlements due to recent NHS changes, controversy over ‘health tourism,' and challenges registering for health services or accessing secondary facilities. Factors requiring greater clarity or improvement included accessibility, communication, and clarity on general practitioner (GP) responsibilities and migrant entitlements. Conclusion: Legislation to restrict access to healthcare based on immigration status could further compromise the health of vulnerable individuals in Britain. This study highlights current challenges in health services policy and practice and the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in healthcare advocacy (eg, helping the voices of the most vulnerable reach policy-makers). Thus, it contributes to broadening national discussions and enabling more nuanced interpretation of ongoing global debates on immigration and health.
Source Title: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/212836
ISSN: 23225939
DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.50
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
2016.05.08L Rafighi.IJPM.pdfPublished version474.22 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

PublishedView/Download

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

19
checked on May 22, 2022

Page view(s)

37
checked on May 26, 2022

Download(s)

1
checked on May 26, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.