Robert Mugabe, the WHO and Healthcare Provision in Zimbabwe
Last week, amid controversy the WHO (World Health Organization) announced that it had nominated the Zimbabwean president, Robert Mugabe, as a goodwill ambassador. Goodwill ambassadors are generally well-known personalities from various different backgrounds who advocate for specific causes on the basis of their nobility. Beyonce, Shakira and Angelina Jolie have all served (or currently serve) as goodwill ambassadors for various causes helping to bring them to the attention of the general public.
For the WHO, goodwill ambassadors help raise awareness of important health problems and solutions, and are appointed for two years
at a time. The new director general of the WHO, Tedros Ghebreyesus, asked Zimbabwe's leader to serve in this role to help tackle NCD's (non-communicable diseases) across Africa. The decision triggered confusion and controversy from WHO member states, with the UK, USA and Canada quickly criticizing the new appointment.
This prompted me to look into healthcare provision in Zimbabwe, as whilst I am familiar with its leader, I am not familiar with the provision of health services across the country. Additionally i was intrigued by the explanation given by the WHO over the new appointment who hailed the country and its placement of UHC (universal healthcare coverage) at the centre of all its policies.
From what I have been able to pull together from various sources across the internet, the Zimbabwean government's investment in the health sector has been inadequate and the country has generally depended on donor support and direct budget support to run the public health institutions. As a result of this the health sector has failed to provide adequate services to the people.
The severe social and economic challenges have also caused a loss of experienced health sector personal with the Zimbabwean Ministry of Health and Child Welfare (HR for Health Information sheet) in 2010 reporting just 1.6 physicians and 7.2 nurses for every 10000 people. Lack of staff in the hospitals also has a direct impact on medical education of both newly qualified doctors and those studying medicine at university. The National Health Strategy for Zimbabwe between 2009 and 2013 also reported vacancy rates of over 50% in the roles of doctors, midwives, laboratory and environmental health staff.
The WHO profile on Zimbabwe identified the probability of dying from NCD's between the ages of 19 and 34 at 19%. It also looked at strategies employed by the government to tackle this issue where it is severely lacking. As of 2014, the health service does not have a comprehensive plan to tackle NCD's, reduce the burden of smoking, improve physical exercise amongst the population or tackle the shared risk factors of NCD's.
So all of this leads to the question of why Robert Mugabe appointed as the new WHO goodwill ambassador for promotion of NCD prevention across Africa, when his own county has a poor record of dealing with and tackling this issue. This was further complicated by the WHO's embarrassing reversal of this appointment in less than a week.
Whilst many people have various ideas regarding this issue, unfortunately it will never be clear over the true motives. However it might have been an effort to draw the attention of the world to the situation in Africa, and possibly an attempt (perhaps misguided) to ensure participation and inclusion of Africa in the ranks at the WHO, as the current director-general is the first person from the African region of the WHO to serve in this position.
For the WHO, goodwill ambassadors help raise awareness of important health problems and solutions, and are appointed for two years
at a time. The new director general of the WHO, Tedros Ghebreyesus, asked Zimbabwe's leader to serve in this role to help tackle NCD's (non-communicable diseases) across Africa. The decision triggered confusion and controversy from WHO member states, with the UK, USA and Canada quickly criticizing the new appointment.
This prompted me to look into healthcare provision in Zimbabwe, as whilst I am familiar with its leader, I am not familiar with the provision of health services across the country. Additionally i was intrigued by the explanation given by the WHO over the new appointment who hailed the country and its placement of UHC (universal healthcare coverage) at the centre of all its policies.From what I have been able to pull together from various sources across the internet, the Zimbabwean government's investment in the health sector has been inadequate and the country has generally depended on donor support and direct budget support to run the public health institutions. As a result of this the health sector has failed to provide adequate services to the people.
The severe social and economic challenges have also caused a loss of experienced health sector personal with the Zimbabwean Ministry of Health and Child Welfare (HR for Health Information sheet) in 2010 reporting just 1.6 physicians and 7.2 nurses for every 10000 people. Lack of staff in the hospitals also has a direct impact on medical education of both newly qualified doctors and those studying medicine at university. The National Health Strategy for Zimbabwe between 2009 and 2013 also reported vacancy rates of over 50% in the roles of doctors, midwives, laboratory and environmental health staff.
The WHO profile on Zimbabwe identified the probability of dying from NCD's between the ages of 19 and 34 at 19%. It also looked at strategies employed by the government to tackle this issue where it is severely lacking. As of 2014, the health service does not have a comprehensive plan to tackle NCD's, reduce the burden of smoking, improve physical exercise amongst the population or tackle the shared risk factors of NCD's.
So all of this leads to the question of why Robert Mugabe appointed as the new WHO goodwill ambassador for promotion of NCD prevention across Africa, when his own county has a poor record of dealing with and tackling this issue. This was further complicated by the WHO's embarrassing reversal of this appointment in less than a week.
Whilst many people have various ideas regarding this issue, unfortunately it will never be clear over the true motives. However it might have been an effort to draw the attention of the world to the situation in Africa, and possibly an attempt (perhaps misguided) to ensure participation and inclusion of Africa in the ranks at the WHO, as the current director-general is the first person from the African region of the WHO to serve in this position.
Comments
Post a Comment