You are on page 1of 1
Introduction ese Earp ha ng tng alto fi es insane. These steno collet ai and sop developed na seis cone. Kise ven necesita hey ol feel an lok ifn in he ue ARough they hae © gol iin ag ean nd nen hy es ce numberof calleges Hea planers an pall at first place, concerned with the explosion of costs and the in. aig problems financing hee yen The ruin pape hovers, ie er of communi ml id amangemes nn ‘The paper more specie discusses how and why European society came o deel sich coltvearangemens a cope wh inva advent steely, sl Heath nce led tom sal pops ae aay argent foe Dura nina wt veces tt and eae coins Te ay se, te crucial in this history. The paper briefly fi ‘ os ey tent define hat icy is abou. ils dctes one of th mn cages — by European social health insurance systems: i.e, the n ae (re)discover values and emotions behind the fi ea nd te fg an te ea, Thr ls ot ed fom Eagan xe middle-income countries that consider int i ‘health insurance systems. eee cae ‘The Genesis of Collective. Nation-Wide and Compulsory ‘Arrangements to Cone with individual Adversities In the period of early industrial capitalism and accelerating urbanization at the end of 19% century Europe, small-scale voluntary ‘mutual insurance movements were created in order to cope with changing needs. “Traditional” mutual aid mechanisms, based on kinship and on the tradition of eraftsmen’s guilds (which have existed in Europe since medieval times) were no longer adequate in this dramatically changing envionment. Strong associations developed where workers put part of their meagre salary aside—often on a ‘weekly basis—for a common fund that would help their families in case of loss of employment, disability, old age, death, etc. In that period, the health care system was sill of limited effectiveness and coverage of health care was of rather marginal importance in these ‘mutual aid dynamics. Benefits were mainly of a non-medical nature. {In England and Wales these dynamics took the form of “friendly societies’ (almost half of the adult male population belonged to a society by the middle ofthe 19% century) in France these associations wete called ‘Sociéés de secours mutuel’(e. mutual aid societies). ‘The management of these associations was relatively ‘autonomous, but many of them were inherently weak and vulnerable ‘because of the limited knowledge of actuarial science. Contributions "were set according to vague rules. The general lack of administrative skills facilitated comuption, fraud, and favoritism. Small in terms of membership and capital, these associations brought together people ‘vith similar social professional and even demographic characteristics, ‘and often with common political ideas. The homogeneity of the membership reinforced a sense of togethemess; but it also led to a concentration of risks of (occupational) disease or loss of work. The erga EIR Te Ca]