![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
The escalating expenditure on patients with HIV/AIDS within an inadequately funded public health system is tending towards crowding out care for patients with non-HIV illnesses. Priority-setting decisions are thus required and should increasingly be based on an explicit, transparent and accountable process to facilitate sustainability. South Africa's public health system is eroding, even though the government has received extensive donor financing for specific conditions, such as HIV/AIDS. The South African government's 2007 HIV plan anticipated costs exceeding 20% of the annual health budget with a strong focus on treatment interventions, while the recently announced 2012–2016 National Strategic HIV plan could cost up to US$16 billion. Conversely, the total non-HIV health budget has remained static in recent years, effectively reducing the supply of health care for other diseases. While the South African government cannot meet all demands for health care simultaneously, health funders should attempt to allocate health resources in a fair, efficient, transparent and accountable manner, in order to ensure that publicly funded health care is delivered in a reasonable and non-discriminatory fashion. We recommend a process for resource allocation that includes ethical, economic, legal and policy considerations. This process, adapted for use by South Africa's policy-makers, could bring health, political, economic and ethical gains, whilst allaying a social crisis as mounting treatment commitments generated by HIV have the potential to overwhelm the health system.
Acknowledgements
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this manuscript.