The management defends services for poor patients as questions raised on social media about access to senior doctors and affordable treatment
NEW DELHI — A social media video questioning the functioning of Alshifa Hospital in Delhi has triggered widespread discussion about the role and responsibilities of charitable healthcare institutions, particularly those serving low-income communities.
The controversy began after a video by blogger Qamar Kranti compared the services of Alshifa Hospital, run under the umbrella of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, with those of Holy Family Hospital, a long-established missionary hospital in the capital. The video raised concerns about whether poor patients at Alshifa receive adequate access to senior doctors and affordable healthcare services.
The discussion gained traction on social media, with many users questioning whether a hospital established with a charitable mission should provide greater concessions and wider access to specialist care. Critics particularly pointed to the availability of low-cost outpatient services and the accessibility of senior consultants for economically weaker patients.
Speaking on the issue, journalist and editor Malik Asghar Hashmi said the debate had largely centred on the perception that Holy Family Hospital offers a dedicated low-cost morning outpatient service for poor patients, while many people were unaware of similar arrangements at Alshifa.
According to information provided by Alshifa Hospital’s management, the institution operates a special outpatient department for needy patients between 3 pm and 5 pm, where consultations cost only ₹20 and medicines are also included. Hospital Director Dr Ahmad Minhajuddin reportedly said the service is specifically aimed at helping economically disadvantaged patients.
The hospital also stated that doctors associated with Jamaat-e-Islami Hind’s medical and social service network participate in the programme. Some doctors volunteer their services without payment, while others receive an honorarium for their work.
One of the key criticisms raised in the viral video concerned the availability of senior doctors in low-cost outpatient clinics. Hashmi acknowledged that the issue deserved attention and suggested that hospital authorities should examine ways to improve access if genuine concerns existed. At the same time, he noted that running a charitable hospital presents significant financial and administrative challenges.
The discussion also touched on allegations that medical representatives frequently visit the hospital and that patients may be prescribed expensive medicines. While these claims have not been independently verified, participants in the debate argued that greater use of generic medicines could help reduce treatment costs for patients.
Hospital representatives have pointed to several welfare measures already in place. According to information discussed during the programme, Alshifa maintains a “Poor Fund” financed through Zakat contributions. Patients who are unable to pay for treatment may receive assistance after an assessment process that includes a review of their financial condition.
The hospital is also said to offer discounts in certain cases. Examples cited during the discussion included financial concessions for patients facing large medical bills and discounts available to teachers associated with Jamaat-e-Islami institutions. It was also claimed that similar concessions are available to priests and temple priests.
Another aspect highlighted by hospital officials relates to the cost of critical care. According to the discussion, Alshifa’s intensive care facilities are considerably less expensive than those at many private hospitals. Hospital representatives reportedly said that patients are often transferred to Alshifa from other hospitals after families are unable to continue paying higher treatment costs elsewhere.
The debate has also prompted broader questions about how charitable hospitals should be evaluated. Supporters of Alshifa argue that comparisons with institutions such as Holy Family Hospital may not always be fair, given differences in age, funding sources and organisational structures. They note that Holy Family has been operating for decades, while Alshifa was established much later and relies heavily on community support.
At the same time, several participants in the discussion agreed that public criticism should not be dismissed outright. They argued that hospitals serving the community should remain open to feedback and continue improving systems wherever shortcomings are identified.
The controversy has highlighted the challenges faced by charitable healthcare institutions across India, where rising medical costs, expensive specialist training and growing patient expectations place pressure on hospitals attempting to balance affordability with quality care.
While opinions remain divided, the discussion has brought greater public attention to how charitable hospitals operate and how they can improve services for the communities they aim to serve. Both critics and supporters appear to agree on one point: any genuine shortcomings should be addressed, while efforts to provide affordable healthcare to poor and vulnerable patients should continue.
