State Health Access Reform Evaluation Essay - Essay for you

Essay for you

State Health Access Reform Evaluation Essay

Rating: 4.2/5.0 (17 Votes)

Category: Essay

Description

EVALUATING NORTH AMERICAN HEALTH SYSTEMS Essay Research

EVALUATING NORTH AMERICAN HEALTH SYSTEMS Essay Research

EVALUATING NORTH AMERICAN HEALTH SYSTEMS Essay, Research Paper

Compensating the affairs of economic efficiency with the demands of sociopolitical rights is a constant source of tension in Canada and the United States alike. In no other element is this tension more apparent than in the group of complex markets we call the health care system.

Canadians have been fortunate enough to receive a universal health care system for nearly forty years. This is a single-payer system funded by the governments, both provincial and federal, but at what costs? Is health care not unlike any other commodity, or is it the privilege of every citizen? Health care has elements of common economic behavior, however, there are also certain social values associated with it. It is this struggle of defining what health care is that causes such anxiety among economists. The Canadian health care system is slowly crippling the economy, and reforms must be devised to preserve the pride of Canada; our health care system itself.

The pluralistic health care scheme of the United States, as well, has serious socioeconomic implications, and American policy makers are looking toward the model of the Canadian system for answers. Both the United States and Canada must reform health care policy, but to what extent? Obviously these questions cannot necessarily yield clear, concise answers, however they will provide insight into analyzing the current and proposed systems of health care.

Certainly if Canada is to maintain a high standard of care it must adopt an economically efficient, revenue generating system. Moreover the United States must adopt the single-payer system of Canada while still retaining a strong revenue base. This paper will discuss the strengths and shortcomings of the Canadian health care system, and how health care is a sociopolitical enigma. Furthermore, how the single-payer system is the only realistic response to the growing inadequacies within the American socioeconomic status.

CANADIAN HEALTH CARE STRUCTURE

Serving as a general background in its appraisal, it is necessary to outline the history and the ambient factors of the Canada health care that is so sought after by the United States. The Canadian health-insurance program, called Medicare, is administered by provincial governments and regulated and partly financed by the national government. Medicare pays basic medical and hospital bills for all Canadians, where the governments determine the criterion of basic care, to insure and maintain a standard level of service. As early as 1919, Canada?s Liberal party promised national health insurance, but the first real step was taken in Saskatchewan, where in 1947 province wide hospital insurance was introduced. A national hospital-insurance act followed in 1958, and by 1960, 99% of Canadians were covered by government run hospital insurance. Saskatchewan was again the first in 1961 to introduce medical-care insurance which covered doctors? services as well. However, this was not an easy transformation. In 1962 when the medical insurance act was implemented, the doctors of Saskatchewan went on strike. As a part of the settlement the government agreed to a modified plan that addressed some of the doctors? grievances. Despite the opposition from provinces, doctors and insurance companies, national Medicare legislation was in place by 1967, and today health care is a constitutional right.

The arrangement reached by all provinces by 1972 was that the federal government paid half the cost of the provincial plans, provided the plans met five principles: accessibility, universality of coverage, portability from province to province, comprehensiveness of service, and government administration. Under the system the health care provider bills the provincial plan directly. The Canadian Health Act, effective in 1984, clarified the national standards and may penalize provinces that allow doctors to bill for more than the Medicare rate.

The Canadian provinces spend a third of their budgets on health and hospitals. High-tech medicine and an aging population have caused Canada?s medical costs to rise significantly over the past decade. Increasingly, governments attempt to control costs by promoting personal fitness, cutting back the number of hospital beds and establishing caps on doctors? earnings. The costs have become so overwhelming some provinces have considered revoking coverage of prescription drugs for seniors, optometry, physiotherapy, and chiropractic treatments. There are no doubt different views regarding spending for health care, however, few wish to revert to a free market system. In fact, most Canadians consider the health care program the pride of Canada and that they have an advantage over the United States system that costs Americans more. Canada spends $1000 less per capita on health care than the U.S. but delivers more care and greater choice for patients. The Canadian health care system has gone through extensive transitions and is a part of an evolutionary process.

AMERICAN HEALTH CARE STRUCTURE

Over the past several years, the provision of medical services has increasingly become the responsibility of the state

in developed nations, except for in the United States. Unlike the rest of the world?s systems, the United States medical care system remains largely private and entrepreneurial. The popularity of free market health care systems was fueled by its successes in technological and pharmaceutical inventions that followed the wartime experiences. This reinforced the American public to resist government interference in health matters. Nevertheless, public funds have been used, and there has been a certain degree, public administration in the health system. The inability of millions of citizens to obtain or to pay for even minimal levels of care forced the federal government to intervene. It was not until the early 1960?s the United States government passed the Medicare and Medicaid laws that established the federal government as an integral part of the health system. The U.S. medical care system is primarily based on the private practice of medicine and job related health insurance programs. American health care is essentially entrepreneurial, with physicians earning their income through a variety of reimbursement mechanisms other than salary, such as the following: fee-for-service, capitation, and per-session. However, this structure is changing as more and more doctors are employed by health maintenance organizations (HMOs). These organizations offer comprehensive service and maintain a certain level of control of spending by regulating doctors? billing. Costs have risen enormously forcing the government to raise more and more funds to accommodate the needs of the public. The following pie graphs illustrate the economic scope of the American health care system of 1990 and that of the dawn of the 21 century.

Laborious efforts have been made to contain and control costs, without limiting access and the availability of service for the poor, aged, and debilitated. Consequently, the mixture of private and public health care systems is characterized by maldistribution of resources and serious inadequacies of access. The current health care system of the U.S. is laden with deficiencies. To illustrate these shortcomings; 17% of the population, some 40 million people, are not covered at all, and another 40 million are only partially covered. Some HMOs make it a condition of a physician?s salary that he or she not overstep the boundaries of insurance costs. This raises questions of whether the doctor may be tempted to limit needed services or fail to take adequate steps to establish a diagnosis, and may discharge a patient prematurely.

In the early 1990?s the United States was in a state of uncertainty. Despite highly trained staff and stock piles of high technology, the United States health care system was a statistical failure. It ranked 16th in the world for infant mortality rates, and life expectancies fell short of that of most industrialized countries. President Clinton has made the most visible attempt to reform the health care program in the United States. Both he and his spouse, Hillary Rodham Clinton, have developed a strategy to prepare and propose a health reform program that the public would understand and accept, and that would neutralize opposition from pharmaceutical manufacturers and the health insurance industry. This illustrates the necessity not only for the evaluation, but the development of alternatives to attain greater economical and social efficiency. The current system is clearly inadequate, the problems are evident: a large percentage of the population cannot access sufficient medical care, and is not covered or protected against the climbing costs. A system whose costs are out of control, and a growing national deficit that the health care system heavily contributes. Unmistakably, the United States health care system is grossly incompetent in providing the public with a standard level of care, and reforms must be taken to contain the swelling costs.

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HEALTH CARE, FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE?

Economic efficiency and sociopolitical rights consistently clash in a capitalist democracy, and this tension is prevalent in the health care system. A basic economic concern is whether health care is like any other commodity. The health care industry can be analyzed with economic frames of reference: wealth, risk aversion, efficient transfers, and utility. However, there are certain symbolic elements of health care that cannot be easily measured. Cultures have fundamental beliefs that encompass the valuation of life and health. Bearing this in mind, it would only seem realistic that there is some sort of right to health care. Nowhere in the American Constitution is it stated that an individual has the right to some basic set of health care services, however, there are certain undefined responsibilities the government has. It can be argued that the Declaration of Independence supports the right for each and every citizen to have the basic care needed to sustain life so as to exercise one?s liberty and to allow the pursuit of happiness. It has been argued that there is a common-law right to equal services, a right of equal access to basic services: such as drinking water. Furthermore this right extends to all citizens and is beyond the reac

Other articles

Реферат на тему EVALUATING_NORTH_AMERICAN_HEALTH_SYSTEMS_Essay_Research

EVALUATING NORTH AMERICAN HEALTH SYSTEMS Essay, Research Paper

Compensating the affairs of economic efficiency with the demands of sociopolitical rights is a constant source of tension in Canada and the United States alike. In no other element is this tension more apparent than in the group of complex markets we call the health care system.

Canadians have been fortunate enough to receive a universal health care system for nearly forty years. This is a single-payer system funded by the governments, both provincial and federal, but at what costs? Is health care not unlike any other commodity, or is it the privilege of every citizen? Health care has elements of common economic behavior, however, there are also certain social values associated with it. It is this struggle of defining what health care is that causes such anxiety among economists. The Canadian health care system is slowly crippling the economy, and reforms must be devised to preserve the pride of Canada; our health care system itself.

The pluralistic health care scheme of the United States, as well, has serious socioeconomic implications, and American policy makers are looking toward the model of the Canadian system for answers. Both the United States and Canada must reform health care policy, but to what extent? Obviously these questions cannot necessarily yield clear, concise answers, however they will provide insight into analyzing the current and proposed systems of health care.

Certainly if Canada is to maintain a high standard of care it must adopt an economically efficient, revenue generating system. Moreover the United States must adopt the single-payer system of Canada while still retaining a strong revenue base. This paper will discuss the strengths and shortcomings of the Canadian health care system, and how health care is a sociopolitical enigma. Furthermore, how the single-payer system is the only realistic response to the growing inadequacies within the American socioeconomic status.

CANADIAN HEALTH CARE STRUCTURE

Serving as a general background in its appraisal, it is necessary to outline the history and the ambient factors of the Canada health care that is so sought after by the United States. The Canadian health-insurance program, called Medicare, is administered by provincial governments and regulated and partly financed by the national government. Medicare pays basic medical and hospital bills for all Canadians, where the governments determine the criterion of basic care, to insure and maintain a standard level of service. As early as 1919, Canada?s Liberal party promised national health insurance, but the first real step was taken in Saskatchewan, where in 1947 province wide hospital insurance was introduced. A national hospital-insurance act followed in 1958, and by 1960, 99% of Canadians were covered by government run hospital insurance. Saskatchewan was again the first in 1961 to introduce medical-care insurance which covered doctors? services as well. However, this was not an easy transformation. In 1962 when the medical insurance act was implemented, the doctors of Saskatchewan went on strike. As a part of the settlement the government agreed to a modified plan that addressed some of the doctors? grievances. Despite the opposition from provinces, doctors and insurance companies, national Medicare legislation was in place by 1967, and today health care is a constitutional right.

The arrangement reached by all provinces by 1972 was that the federal government paid half the cost of the provincial plans, provided the plans met five principles: accessibility, universality of coverage, portability from province to province, comprehensiveness of service, and government administration. Under the system the health care provider bills the provincial plan directly. The Canadian Health Act, effective in 1984, clarified the national standards and may penalize provinces that allow doctors to bill for more than the Medicare rate.

The Canadian provinces spend a third of their budgets on health and hospitals. High-tech medicine and an aging population have caused Canada?s medical costs to rise significantly over the past decade. Increasingly, governments attempt to control costs by promoting personal fitness, cutting back the number of hospital beds and establishing caps on doctors? earnings. The costs have become so overwhelming some provinces have considered revoking coverage of prescription drugs for seniors, optometry, physiotherapy, and chiropractic treatments. There are no doubt different views regarding spending for health care, however, few wish to revert to a free market system. In fact, most Canadians consider the health care program the pride of Canada and that they have an advantage over the United States system that costs Americans more. Canada spends $1000 less per capita on health care than the U.S. but delivers more care and greater choice for patients. The Canadian health care system has gone through extensive transitions and is a part of an evolutionary process.

AMERICAN HEALTH CARE STRUCTURE

Over the past several years, the provision of medical services has increasingly become the responsibility of the state in developed nations, except for in the United States. Unlike the rest of the world?s systems, the United States medical care system remains largely private and entrepreneurial. The popularity of free market health care systems was fueled by its successes in technological and pharmaceutical inventions that followed the wartime experiences. This reinforced the American public to resist government interference in health matters. Nevertheless, public funds have been used, and there has been a certain degree, public administration in the health system. The inability of millions of citizens to obtain or to pay for even minimal levels of care forced the federal government to intervene. It was not until the early 1960?s the United States government passed the Medicare and Medicaid laws that established the federal government as an integral part of the health system. The U.S. medical care system is primarily based on the private practice of medicine and job related health insurance programs. American health care is essentially entrepreneurial, with physicians earning their income through a variety of reimbursement mechanisms other than salary, such as the following: fee-for-service, capitation, and per-session. However, this structure is changing as more and more doctors are employed by health maintenance organizations (HMOs). These organizations offer comprehensive service and maintain a certain level of control of spending by regulating doctors? billing. Costs have risen enormously forcing the government to raise more and more funds to accommodate the needs of the public. The following pie graphs illustrate the economic scope of the American health care system of 1990 and that of the dawn of the 21 century.

Laborious efforts have been made to contain and control costs, without limiting access and the availability of service for the poor, aged, and debilitated. Consequently, the mixture of private and public health care systems is characterized by maldistribution of resources and serious inadequacies of access. The current health care system of the U.S. is laden with deficiencies. To illustrate these shortcomings; 17% of the population, some 40 million people, are not covered at all, and another 40 million are only partially covered. Some HMOs make it a condition of a physician?s salary that he or she not overstep the boundaries of insurance costs. This raises questions of whether the doctor may be tempted to limit needed services or fail to take adequate steps to establish a diagnosis, and may discharge a patient prematurely.

In the early 1990?s the United States was in a state of uncertainty. Despite highly trained staff and stock piles of high technology, the United States health care system was a statistical failure. It ranked 16th in the world for infant mortality rates, and life expectancies fell short of that of most industrialized countries. President Clinton has made the most visible attempt to reform the health care program in the United States. Both he and his spouse, Hillary Rodham Clinton, have developed a strategy to prepare and propose a health reform program that the public would understand and accept, and that would neutralize opposition from pharmaceutical manufacturers and the health insurance industry. This illustrates the necessity not only for the evaluation, but the development of alternatives to attain greater economical and social efficiency. The current system is clearly inadequate, the problems are evident: a large percentage of the population cannot access sufficient medical care, and is not covered or protected against the climbing costs. A system whose costs are out of control, and a growing national deficit that the health care system heavily contributes. Unmistakably, the United States health care system is grossly incompetent in providing the public with a standard level of care, and reforms must be taken to contain the swelling costs.

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HEALTH CARE, FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE?

Economic efficiency and sociopolitical rights consistently clash in a capitalist democracy, and this tension is prevalent in the health care system. A basic economic concern is whether health care is like any other commodity. The health care industry can be analyzed with economic frames of reference: wealth, risk aversion, efficient transfers, and utility. However, there are certain symbolic elements of health care that cannot be easily measured. Cultures have fundamental beliefs that encompass the valuation of life and health. Bearing this in mind, it would only seem realistic that there is some sort of right to health care. Nowhere in the American Constitution is it stated that an individual has the right to some basic set of health care services, however, there are certain undefined responsibilities the government has. It can be argued that the Declaration of Independence supports the right for each and every citizen to have the basic care needed to sustain life so as to exercise one?s liberty and to allow the pursuit of happiness. It has been argued that there is a common-law right to equal services, a right of equal access to basic services: such as drinking water. Furthermore this right extends to all citizens and is beyond the reac

Health care reform essays

MegaEssays.com health care reform


Third Party Oversight in Health Care Reform
The United States health care system is under a period of rapid change. Managed care growth, technological changes and a growing population is forcing the American health system to reform and change its traditional health care model.
With the rapid changes in the health care system, oversight of these changes will be crucial to ensure compliance. Health care providers will be facing challenges and pressures on implementing the changes from reform. Ensuring that the changes brought from reform are followed and evaluated will ensure the American public is receiving health care from providers that is safe, effective, and appropriate.
Third party oversight to health care providers in the United States will need to be performed. In order for reform to take place health care organizations will need to obtain an accreditation from an accrediting organization that has been approved to accredit health care organizations by United States Government. Failure to comply or seek accreditation will result in the loss of licensure to perform health care and payments form Medicare and Medicaid will be suspended.
An existing third party overseer for health care organizations today is the Joint Commission of Accreditation of Heath Care Organizations (JCAHO). The Joint Commission evaluates and accredits nearly 20,000 health care organizations in the United States. An independent, not-for-profit organization, the Joint Commission is the nation’s predominate standards-setting and accrediting body in health care since 1951 (JCAHO,2000)
In order for an organization to earn and maintain accreditation, and organization must undergo an on-site survey by a Joint Commission surveyor at least every three years. Laboratories seeking accreditation must be surveyed every two years. (JCAHO, 2000) Organizations are provided a standard manual with applying for accreditation. This manual contains over 350 standar.

Related Essays:

health care reform. (1969, December 31). In MegaEssays.com. Retrieved 04:58, August 08, 2016, from http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/60263.html

MegaEssays. "health care reform ." MegaEssays.com. MegaEssays.com, (December 31, 1969). Web. 08 Aug. 2016.

MegaEssays, "health care reform. " MegaEssays.com, http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/60263.html (accessed August 08, 2016)

Essay on Management

Essay/Term paper: Evaluating north american health systems Essay, term paper, research paper: Management

Free essays available online are good but they will not follow the guidelines of your particular writing assignment. If you need a custom term paper on Management: EVALUATING NORTH AMERICAN HEALTH SYSTEMS. you can hire a professional writer here to write you a high quality authentic essay. While free essays can be traced by Turnitin (plagiarism detection program), our custom written essays will pass any plagiarism test. Our writing service will save you time and grade.

Compensating the affairs of economic efficiency with the demands of sociopolitical rights is a constant source of tension in Canada and the United States alike. In no other element is this tension more apparent than in the group of complex markets we call the health care system.

Canadians have been fortunate enough to receive a universal health care system for nearly forty years. This is a single-payer system funded by the governments, both provincial and federal, but at what costs? Is health care not unlike any other commodity, or is it the privilege of every citizen? Health care has elements of common economic behavior, however, there are also certain social values associated with it. It is this struggle of defining what health care is that causes such anxiety among economists. The Canadian health care system is slowly crippling the economy, and reforms must be devised to preserve the pride of Canada; our health care system itself.

The pluralistic health care scheme of the United States, as well, has serious socioeconomic implications, and American policy makers are looking toward the model of the Canadian system for answers. Both the United States and Canada must reform health care policy, but to what extent? Obviously these questions cannot necessarily yield clear, concise answers, however they will provide insight into analyzing the current and proposed systems of health care.

Certainly if Canada is to maintain a high standard of care it must adopt an economically efficient, revenue generating system. Moreover the United States must adopt the single-payer system of Canada while still retaining a strong revenue base. This paper will discuss the strengths and shortcomings of the Canadian health care system, and how health care is a sociopolitical enigma. Furthermore, how the single-payer system is the only realistic response to the growing inadequacies within the American socioeconomic status.

CANADIAN HEALTH CARE STRUCTURE

Serving as a general background in its appraisal, it is necessary to outline the history and the ambient factors of the Canada health care that is so sought after by the United States. The Canadian health-insurance program, called Medicare, is administered by provincial governments and regulated and partly financed by the national government. Medicare pays basic medical and hospital bills for all Canadians, where the governments determine the criterion of basic care, to insure and maintain a standard level of service. As early as 1919, Canada"s Liberal party promised national health insurance, but the first real step was taken in Saskatchewan, where in 1947 province wide hospital insurance was introduced. A national hospital-insurance act followed in 1958, and by 1960, 99% of Canadians were covered by government run hospital insurance. Saskatchewan was again the first in 1961 to introduce medical-care insurance which covered doctors" services as well. However, this was not an easy transformation. In 1962 when the medical insurance act was implemented, the doctors of Saskatchewan went on strike. As a part of the settlement the government agreed to a modified plan that addressed some of the doctors" grievances. Despite the opposition from provinces, doctors and insurance companies, national Medicare legislation was in place by 1967, and today health care is a constitutional right.

The arrangement reached by all provinces by 1972 was that the federal government paid half the cost of the provincial plans, provided the plans met five principles: accessibility, universality of coverage, portability from province to province, comprehensiveness of service, and government administration. Under the system the health care provider bills the provincial plan directly. The Canadian Health Act, effective in 1984, clarified the national standards and may penalize provinces that allow doctors to bill for more than the Medicare rate.

The Canadian provinces spend a third of their budgets on health and hospitals. High-tech medicine and an aging population have caused Canada"s medical costs to rise significantly over the past decade. Increasingly, governments attempt to control costs by promoting personal fitness, cutting back the number of hospital beds and establishing caps on doctors" earnings. The costs have become so overwhelming some provinces have considered revoking coverage of prescription drugs for seniors, optometry, physiotherapy, and chiropractic treatments. There are no doubt different views regarding spending for health care, however, few wish to revert to a free market system. In fact, most Canadians consider the health care program the pride of Canada and that they have an advantage over the United States system that costs Americans more. "Canada spends $1000 less per capita on health care than the U.S. but delivers more care and greater choice for patients." The Canadian health care system has gone through extensive transitions and is a part of an evolutionary process.

AMERICAN HEALTH CARE STRUCTURE

Over the past several years, the provision of medical services has increasingly become the responsibility of the state in developed nations, except for in the United States. "Unlike the rest of the world"s systems, the United States medical care system remains largely private and entrepreneurial." The popularity of free market health care systems was fueled by its successes in technological and pharmaceutical inventions that followed the wartime experiences. This reinforced the American public to resist government interference in health matters. Nevertheless, public funds have been used, and there has been a certain degree, public administration in the health system. "The inability of millions of citizens to obtain or to pay for even minimal levels of care forced the federal government to intervene." It was not until the early 1960"s the United States government passed the Medicare and Medicaid laws that established the federal government as an integral part of the health system. The U.S. medical care system is primarily based on the private practice of medicine and job related health insurance programs. American health care is essentially entrepreneurial, with physicians earning their income through a variety of reimbursement mechanisms other than salary, such as the following: fee-for-service, capitation, and per-session. However, this structure is changing as more and more doctors are employed by health maintenance organizations (HMOs). These organizations offer comprehensive service and maintain a certain level of control of spending by regulating doctors" billing. Costs have risen enormously forcing the government to raise more and more funds to accommodate the needs of the public. The following pie graphs illustrate the economic scope of the American health care system of 1990 and that of the dawn of the 21 century.

Laborious efforts have been made to contain and control costs, without limiting access and the availability of service for the poor, aged, and debilitated. Consequently, the mixture of private and public health care systems is characterized by maldistribution of resources and serious inadequacies of access. The current health care system of the U.S. is laden with deficiencies. To illustrate these shortcomings; 17% of the population, some 40 million people, are not covered at all, and another 40 million are only partially covered. Some HMOs make it a condition of a physician"s salary that he or she not overstep the boundaries of insurance costs. This raises questions of whether the doctor may be tempted to limit needed services or fail to take adequate steps to establish a diagnosis, and may discharge a patient prematurely.

In the early 1990"s the United States was in a state of uncertainty. Despite highly trained staff and stock piles of high technology, the United States health care system was a statistical failure. It ranked 16th in the world for infant mortality rates, and life expectancies fell short of that of most industrialized countries. President Clinton has made the most visible attempt to reform the health care program in the United States. Both he and his spouse, Hillary Rodham Clinton, have developed a strategy to prepare and propose a health reform program that the public would understand and accept, and that would neutralize opposition from pharmaceutical manufacturers and the health insurance industry. This illustrates the necessity not only for the evaluation, but the development of alternatives to attain greater economical and social efficiency. The current system is clearly inadequate, the problems are evident: a large percentage of the population cannot access sufficient medical care, and is not covered or protected against the climbing costs. A system whose costs are out of control, and a growing national deficit that the health care system heavily contributes. Unmistakably, the United States health care system is grossly incompetent in providing the public with a standard level of care, and reforms must be taken to contain the swelling costs.

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HEALTH CARE, FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE?

Economic efficiency and sociopolitical rights consistently clash in a capitalist democracy, and this tension is prevalent in the health care system. A basic economic concern is whether health care is like any other commodity. The health care industry can be analyzed with economic frames of reference: wealth, risk aversion, efficient transfers, and utility. However, there are certain symbolic elements of health care that cannot be easily measured. Cultures have fundamental beliefs that encompass the valuation of life and health. Bearing this in mind, it would only seem realistic that there is some sort of right to health care. Nowhere in the American Constitution is it stated that an individual has the right to some basic set of health care services, however, there are certain undefined responsibilities the government has. It can be argued that the Declaration of Independence supports the right for each and every citizen to have the basic care needed to sustain life so as to exercise one"s liberty and to allow the pursuit of happiness. It has been argued that there is a common-law right to equal services, a right of equal access to basic services: such as drinking water. Furthermore this right extends to all citizens and is beyond the reac

Other sample model essays:

Health Care Reform essay topics, buy custom Health Care Reform essay paper sample cheap, service

Custom Health Care Reform essay paper writing service Buy Health Care Reform essay paper online

Health policy is one of the major social policies in any nation because its formulation is highly influenced by many social factors that affect the development of social policies. The reform of the American health care sector such that the health services are of high quality, readily available and affordable to all citizens is a public policy issue that has been discussed in the country for a long time. The weight of the discussion has been varying with respect to the changes in the influential politicians and activists (Hilary Clinton, George Bush, Barrack Obama and others) and how much the reforms have been viewed as an issue of public concern. This paper discusses some of the recommendations for the reforms that were made and also how the Obama's plan fits these recommendations.

There were some recommendations that were made by health policy exports, health insurance executives, hospital administrators, economists and other groups in America. First, they recommended that the federal and state laws be rationalized to support the coordination of care, facilitate organizational innovation and streamline the administrative and financial functions. This is because the federal and state laws previously provided inconsistencies that acted as barriers to the reform of health care system. For instance, there was inconsistence in the coordination among the service providers. They demanded that the reforms contain the laws that govern the corporate practice of the medicine doctrines and the practice limitations scope (Annals of Internal Medicine).

Secondly, they recommended for the development of a health information technology infrastructure having the set national standards to enhance effective exchange of data. They made this recommendfatio0n because a well developed information technology system is important in the collection of data which in turn facilitates quality improvement. To achieve this, they said that the system needed a rapid development and implementation of the national standards to enhance the data management in the health care system (Annals of Internal Medicine).

Lastly, they recommended the establishment of independent agency that is securely funded to sponsor and carry out the evaluation of the researches on the effectiveness of the devices, drugs and other various medical interventions. This is due to the lack of data on the effectiveness of the various processes of care and medical interventions. This independent agency was to analyze the cost effectiveness of the various health care diagnostics, therapeutics and procedures among others. The groups further demanded that the methods used and data be transparent and all the researches be available to the public and various institutions such as the health care providers to facilitate the making of sound health decisions (Annals of Internal Medicine).

How the Obama's plan fits these recommendations

The rising cost of health care is the biggest challenge. For example, the rising of the insurance premiums makes the many people not to access quality health services. To deal with such situation in the United States of America, the Obama's reform plan seems superior as it will enhance the modernization of the health care sector making all its sectors more efficient. The doctors in America are paid according to their performance and they focus on the betterment of health care services. Also, the plan gives small firms and individuals a chance of joining the large insurance pools in America. These pools will help prevent the toppling of the system by the view people who incurs high costs for medical services and will help people from being subjected to very costly processes (Culter M, et al).

The Obama's reforms plan will help the people of the United States of America and will fulfill all the recommendations that were made by various groups in the country.

Buy Health Care Reform essay paper online

Evaluating the Healthcare Reform Program

Evaluating the Healthcare Reform Program

More residents now have health coverage, but the crushing costs of the program endanger its long-term viability. This crisis has been brought about by the failure to address costs while focusing almost exclusively on access.

Anderson (1-2) cites legislative stalling for even modest cost reforms, massive cost overruns, and missed deadlines as evidence of a "deeply flawed" initiative. Furthermore, Wilson (489-492) reports that the healthcare being received by those who are covered by the program is simply not very good. The waits are long and the delivery system is not adequate to meet the needs.

Given the foregoing, it can be seen that healthcare reform in Massachusetts suffers from poor planning in the area of funding, inadequate service delivery systems, cost overruns, failure to implement even modest cost reforms, and even a relatively low standard of care. However, these are not the only problems.

Still another problem with the reform enactment is reported by Krasner (1) who states that hospitals serving low-income neighborhoods (safety net hospitals) are now facing budget shortfalls and have cut back on investing in new equipment. Despite the reform law, many patients at these hospitals are still uninsured. This is said to be because the enrollment in Commonwealth Care is a very slow process. Safety Net hospitals, therefore, are now no longer getting block grants for serving the uninsured and yet they still have to provide that same service. Measures are being taken to help these hospitals but like everything else associated with any government bureaucracy they are slow to be recognized as helpful, slow to be decided upon as a solution to the situation, and slow to then be put in place.

Indeed, it is bureaucracy and a failure to consider costs while basking in the ethereal light associated

More on Evaluating the Healthcare Reform Program.

Evaluating the Healthcare Reform Program. (1969, December 31). In LotsofEssays.com. Retrieved 04:58, August 08, 2016, from http://www.collegetermpapers.com/viewpaper/1303507829.html

Lots of Essays. "Evaluating the Healthcare Reform Program." LotsofEssays.com. LotsofEssays.com, (December 31, 1969). Web. 08 Aug. 2016.

Lots of Essays, "Evaluating the Healthcare Reform Program.," LotsofEssays.com, http://www.collegetermpapers.com/viewpaper/1303507829.html (accessed August 08, 2016)