'Free From Doubt'? The border between charity and the state in the British National Health Service, 1948-74.

IF 0.2
Hannah Blythe, Martin Gorsky
{"title":"'Free From Doubt'? The border between charity and the state in the British National Health Service, 1948-74.","authors":"Hannah Blythe, Martin Gorsky","doi":"10.1093/tcbh/hwag005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Britain's National Health Service (NHS) is widely regarded as epitomizing statist healthcare. However, before its launch in 1948, Britain had a 'mixed economy of welfare' in which charity loomed large, most notably in the voluntary hospitals. This article examines the legacy of this charitable past in the NHS's early decades. Although at its foundation, the Minister of Health, Aneurin Bevan, was determined that the NHS should end reliance on the 'caprice of private charity', political considerations meant that teaching hospitals retained their charitable wealth. Bevan's policy was that the Exchequer would cover all 'ordinary expenditure', with voluntary reserves used only for special purposes, including research, additional comforts and amenities. Thus, a theoretical border between state-funded essentials and charitably financed inessentials was drawn for hospitals in the early welfare state. This article asks whether this border held true in practice. Its method is a comparative history of three case studies: St Bartholomew's Hospital in London, the United Sheffield Hospitals, and the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh. We present quantitative and qualitative analysis of endowment expenditure between 1948 and the NHS's reorganization in 1974. Our findings demonstrate that expectations of a simple division between essential and non-essential aspects of healthcare proved naïve. Charitable spending notionally on research, amenities, and equipment was soon geared to clinical care. It also sustained capital programmes, disproportionately advantaging those hospitals with large inherited assets. Hospital charity also served as a rhetorical and visual device, promoting an ideal of humane care and legitimizing the place of voluntarism within the NHS.</p>","PeriodicalId":520090,"journal":{"name":"Modern British history","volume":"37 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13078793/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern British history","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tcbh/hwag005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Britain's National Health Service (NHS) is widely regarded as epitomizing statist healthcare. However, before its launch in 1948, Britain had a 'mixed economy of welfare' in which charity loomed large, most notably in the voluntary hospitals. This article examines the legacy of this charitable past in the NHS's early decades. Although at its foundation, the Minister of Health, Aneurin Bevan, was determined that the NHS should end reliance on the 'caprice of private charity', political considerations meant that teaching hospitals retained their charitable wealth. Bevan's policy was that the Exchequer would cover all 'ordinary expenditure', with voluntary reserves used only for special purposes, including research, additional comforts and amenities. Thus, a theoretical border between state-funded essentials and charitably financed inessentials was drawn for hospitals in the early welfare state. This article asks whether this border held true in practice. Its method is a comparative history of three case studies: St Bartholomew's Hospital in London, the United Sheffield Hospitals, and the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh. We present quantitative and qualitative analysis of endowment expenditure between 1948 and the NHS's reorganization in 1974. Our findings demonstrate that expectations of a simple division between essential and non-essential aspects of healthcare proved naïve. Charitable spending notionally on research, amenities, and equipment was soon geared to clinical care. It also sustained capital programmes, disproportionately advantaging those hospitals with large inherited assets. Hospital charity also served as a rhetorical and visual device, promoting an ideal of humane care and legitimizing the place of voluntarism within the NHS.

“毫无疑问”?1948年至1974年,英国国家医疗服务体系中慈善机构与国家之间的界限。
英国的国民健康服务体系(NHS)被广泛认为是中央集权医疗保健的缩影。然而,在1948年启动之前,英国是一个“福利混合经济”,慈善事业在其中占很大比重,尤其是在志愿医院。这篇文章检查了这个慈善过去的遗产在NHS的早期几十年。尽管在建立之初,卫生部长安奈林·贝文(动脉瘤in Bevan)决定,NHS应该结束对“私人慈善机构的反复无常”的依赖,但政治考虑意味着教学医院保留了他们的慈善财富。贝文的政策是,财政部将支付所有的“日常开支”,而自愿储备只用于特殊目的,包括研究,额外的舒适和设施。因此,在早期福利国家的医院中,国家资助的必需品和慈善资助的非必需品之间的理论边界被划了出来。这篇文章质疑这条边界在实践中是否成立。它的方法是比较三个案例研究的历史:伦敦的圣巴塞洛缪医院、谢菲尔德联合医院和爱丁堡皇家医院。我们提出了定量和定性分析的捐赠支出之间的1948年和1974年NHS的重组。我们的研究结果表明,对医疗保健基本和非基本方面的简单划分的期望证明了naïve。名义上用于研究、设施和设备的慈善支出很快就转向了临床护理。它还维持了资本方案,使那些继承了大量资产的医院格外有利。医院慈善也作为一种修辞和视觉手段,促进了人道关怀的理想,并使自愿主义在NHS中的地位合法化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书