Abstract
One of the most striking findings of European attitude surveys is the very high level of healthcare solidarity. Analysis of the Democratic Forum discussions allows us to examine the basis for these attitudes. This chapter identifies four distinct framings of healthcare solidarity in the UK, Norway, Germany and Slovenia, respectively: exclusive solidarity, universal solidarity, contributory solidarity and egalitarian solidarity. These framings reflect national differences in citizens’ ideas about the appropriate risk community for healthcare and the rights and duties of the members of that community. In the UK solidarity is limited to insider citizens and hedged by a determination to exclude outsiders, in Norway it is rooted in universal collectivism, in Germany it stems from the community of contributors, and in Slovenia it draws on a shared socialist heritage and emphasis on equality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abela, A. (2004). Solidarity and religion in the European Union: A comparative sociological perspective. In P. G. Xuereb (Ed.), The value(s) of a constitution for Europe. Valetta: European Documentation and Research Center, University of Malta.
Arts, W., & Gelissen, J. (2001). Welfare states, solidarity and justice principles: Does the type really matter? Acta Sociologica, 44(4), 283–299.
Bambra, C. (2005). Cash versus services: ‘worlds of welfare’and the decommodification of cash benefits and health care services. Journal of Social Policy, 34(2), 195–213.
Béland, D., & Gran, B. (2008). Public and private social policy. Health and pension policies in a new era. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
ESS Round 4: European Social Survey Round 4 Data. (2008). Data file edition 4.4. NSD – Norwegian Centre for Research Data, Norway – Data Archive and distributor of ESS data for ESS ERIC.
Gevers, J., Gelissen, J., Arts, W., & Muffels, R. (2000). Public health care in the balance: Exploring popular support for health care systems in the European Union. International Journal of Social Welfare, 9(4), 301–321.
Gollust, S., & Lynch, J. (2011). Who deserves health care? The effects of causal attributions and group cues on public attitudes about responsibility for health care costs. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 36(6), 1061–1095.
Immergut, E. M. (1986). Between state and market: Sickness benefits and social control. In M. Rein & L. Rainwater (Eds.), Public/private interplay in social protection: A comparative study. Armank, NY: Sharpe.
Immergut, E. M. (1992). Health politics: Interests and institutions in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ISSP Research Group. (2015). International Social Survey Programme: Health and Health Care – ISSP 2011. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5800 Data file Version 3.0.0. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4232/1.12252.
Jordan, J. (2010). Institutional feedback and support for the welfare state: The case of national health care. Comparative Political Studies, 43(7), 862–885.
Jordan, J. (2013). Policy feedback and support for the welfare state. Journal of European Social Policy, 23(2), 134–148.
Larsen, C. A. (2008). The institutional logic of welfare attitudes: How welfare regimes influence public support. Comparative Political Studies, 41(2), 145–168.
Maarse, H. (2006). The privatization of health care in Europe: An eight-country analysis. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 31(5), 981–1014.
Maarse, H., & Paulus, A. (2003). Has solidarity survived? A comparative analysis of the effect of social health insurance reform in four European countries. Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, 28(4), 585–614.
Mau, S. (2004). Welfare regimes and the norms of social exchange. Current Sociology, 52(1), 53–74.
Murphy-Berman, V. A., Berman, J. J., & Campbell, E. (1998). Factors affecting health-care allocation decisions: A case of aversive racism? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(24), 2239–2253.
OECD. (2017). OECD health statistics 2017. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved September 15, 2017, from https://doi.org/10.1787/health-data-en.
Petersen, M. B., Slothuus, R., Stubager, R., & Togeby, L. (2011). Deservingness versus values in public opinion on welfare: The automaticity of the deservingness heuristic. European Journal of Political Research, 50(1), 24–52.
Rigby, E., Soss, J., Booske, B. C., Rohan, A. M., & Robert, S. A. (2009). Public responses to health disparities: How group cues influence support for government intervention. Social Science Quarterly, 90(5), 1321–1340.
Taylor Gooby, P., Leruth, B., & Chung, H. (2017). After austerity: Welfare state transformation in Europe after the great recession. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
van Oorschot, W. (2000). Who should get what, and why? On deservingness criteria and the conditionality of solidarity among the public. Policy & Politics, 28(1), 33–48.
van Oorschot, W., & Komter, A. (1998). What is it that ties…? Theoretical perspectives on social bonds. Sociale Wetenschappen, 41(3), 4–24.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hrast, M.F., Immergut, E.M., Rakar, T., Boljka, U., Burlacu, D., Roescu, A. (2018). Healthcare Futures: Visions of Solidarity and the Sustainability of European Healthcare Systems. In: Taylor-Gooby, P., Leruth, B. (eds) Attitudes, Aspirations and Welfare. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75783-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75783-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75782-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75783-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)