Americans Should Have a Free Universal Health Care - Essay Example

? A Position paper to the issue: “Americans Should Have a Free Universal Health Care” Several people talk about the issue of making the universal health care free to people especially to the Americans. Universal health care is a view where everyone, who belongs to a certain place, is covered with basic health amenities and would not be denied of any health related needs (Torrey, 2008). Many debates have been made to hear different sides of the issue. Some says it should not be freed and some says it should be. This paper supports the side where universal health care should be freed. Supporting studies and statements have been compiled and explained all through out for the readers to understand the real meaning of the universal health care. Also, deeper evaluation of why the government should consider a free universal health care has been explained well. The opposing viewpoints have been revealed and were corrected with a brief explanation too. Both sides of the coin have been weighed with various studies to explain the efficiency or importance of the program. A Position paper to the issue: “Americans Should Have a Free Universal Health Care” There are many people who long to have freebies in life such as free food, free key chain, free shirts, and even free gift certificate in salon and spa. Some makes fun of it and some do not. Every laughs that these freebies bring has some “real thing” accompanied with it. It is pretty obvious that every man who wants freebies in life lacks for something. And that is the issue: if there is someone who cries for some “freebies” and it seems to bring goodness on the other side if evaluated well, would the authority listen? Health is one the most important things that people do consider. If they are not having a good lifestyle, their health would be on the peak of harm. They would experience illness and worst, even death. Health has become a big issue in the United States making universal health care to be the answer for these health issues. According to Torrey (2008), universal health care is a view where everyone, who belongs to a certain place, is covered with basic health amenities and would not be denied of any health related needs. Today, there are several debates that discuss whether the Americans should have a free universal health care or not. Julie Sykora (2010) listed a few countries that embrace the universal healthcare system such as Canada, Germany and Japan and compared their health services with the United States of America. According to the writer, the United States is the only industrialized nation whose citizens are not guaranteed health care rights. As a result, as many as 45 million citizens are uninsured. Sykora (2010) also criticizes the unnecessary paperwork included in the American medical care system and considers them repetitive and unnecessary. Also, according to Avery Johnson (2010), a reporter at The Wall Street Journal, it was showed that the data and statistics of the rising uninsured, based on the 2010 Census Bureau, are dramatically increased in a year’s time. Most of the drop is seen in employer sponsored insurance, while people are found moving to government funded health insurance that can be seen with a significant increase in number. The Democrats use these findings to support their health care reform, and, on the other hand, Republicans representatives also want to get every American covered under health insurance. It is obvious that literally, people value their health and always make it a point to work with it. The government should consider their cries. Health is a valuable thing that one should always consider. It is a good point if the government would let the universal health care to be freed. All Americans should have free universal health care. This is because free universal health care would encourage them to start preventive medicines and avoid major health problems. Also, it would let people work part-time or be stay-at-home parents without worrying about the health insurance of their family. Moreover, medical professionals can concentrate on patients rather than worrying about the insurance paperwork and other formalities. According to Erick Armstrong (2012), the American politicians concentrate mostly on the negative side of the universal health system rather than looking at the positive aspects. In addition, they are not ready to talk about the American food habits and other orientations that lead to health complications. Armstrong attributes this aspect of the politicians to be carried along by the pride in American capitalism. The article suggests that when it comes to the quality of food, air, water, and lifestyle, countries life in Canada and Europe rank ahead of America. Armstrong concludes that with the universal health care, government can sort major health problems correctly and properly. As a response to Armstrong’s statement, universal health care could really help on organizing major health problems. Free universal health care will make the government feel unburden with regards to health issues. If they would let the people be cured at the right time and without hassle, the sickness will be prevented from getting worst. Addition to that, free universal health care in the US will give less number of crimes for people will not have any reasons to do such just to provide money for their expenses for it is already free as their rights. It is good if Americans would make it a point to have a free universal health care. Another story that addresses to the universal health care issue is the story of Pibel and Gelder who happened to experience its cruelty. Pibel and Gelder (2006) began by referring some Americans who were subjected to cruel health care realities in the United States. Joel Segal had been kicked out of George Washington Hospital due to lack of insurance, as well as finance. On the other hand, Kiki Peppard had to postpone her surgery because she did not have an insured job. Pibel and Gelder comments that the uninsured, low income American citizens are subjected to such emergency who cannot afford the government funded or the private insurance. Also, the small business owners cannot offer health insurance to their employees at an affordable rate, whereas the large corporations can insure their employees easily. So, Pibel and Gelder supports the universal health care as it offers better coverage to every citizen of the United States. If only universal health care will be served to the people as the same as their rights, there will be no more bad testimonies about health issues offered by the government. It is an immoral action to kick out a sick person only for the reason that he cannot afford to pay his hospital bills, the same as to postpone certain operation due to lack of insurance. Life is more important than anything else and so, its value will never be bought by any amount. There are many ways for a patient to pay his bills. If he will be cured, he can look for a job and eventually, can pay his debts. The government should consider such cases when dealing on implementing laws in the country. They should give chances to everyone and think of some positive aspects that people may give as a response. The government should open their eyes with the realities and remember their promise to serve the people itself. Freeing the universal health care is just one of the ways of how they could serve the people who gave their trust on them. Freeing the universal health care will bring prosperity within the country. Kathy Lavidge (2008) said that she lived in England, a country that embraces the universal health care, for 14 years. She favors universal health care as it improves the quality of life by eliminating the anxieties of day-to-day life. She explores that America is divided into two divisions - people that have access to health care and others who do not have the access, and considered the people without health insurance as America’s second class citizens. She further said that universal health care in United Kingdom relieves the physicians of the unnecessary additional duties as there is absolutely no paperwork in the insurance and the medical system. Problems in terms of health issues will be lessen if the government will allow free universal health care. People will have a peace of mind with whatever sickness they would have in the future. Addition to that, free universal health care will lessen people’s work as they do the process just to be admitted with such insurance. If it is free to all, people will be insured thus, will make them as better and healthy citizen of the country. There are people who considered universal health care as an important need that should be given to the citizen freely. It is not just something that costs nothing. As what has been mentioned above, there are reasons why the government should make it free to the citizen. Actually, according to Richard Blevins (2012), he reviewed the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and considered it to be great, whereas the Republicans are not in favor of it. Blevins predicts that the PPACA would increase insurance coverage for pre-existing health conditions and would prevent the insurance providers from denying Americans coverage based on the pre-existing medical situations. He believes that healthy Americans would be happy and more productive to compete with the global economy. Freeing the universal health care as if it is one’s right will produce good citizen of the country wherein people improves every day. If this will happen, it is good to expect a better nation in the future. The government should always focus on what the people need. Service among the people should be their ultimate goal. There is this article of Greenberger, et al. (1990) that states the future importance of universal health care. Their article expresses the views of the leaders of American College of Physicians (ACP) about the access of universal health care. They take the opportunity to develop a better health care system in the benefit of patients and caregivers. The article emphasizes on the insurance costs due to private sector involvement, administrative costs including insurance paperwork, hassled physicians due to restrictions, and patients who are paying high for health care or not at all getting the benefit. With the results of meetings of ACP chapters, views of the members, and analyzing the facts, the authors came up with two basic conclusions. First, major reforms are necessary in the current health care system. Secondly, gradual political approach is acceptable. However, through thoughtful discussions, ACP has concluded that universal access to basic health care would be needed in the long run. Upon assessing what they said regarding the universal health care, the government should consider it now for it has already been predicted that the time will come where it will be a big issue that needs a big solution. The government should be prepared or ready with it. Freeing the universal health care will be a good start on improving the health programs of the country. On the other hand of the issue if the government should free the universal health care, there are some that are contra with it. Myers (2010) explains that the suggested health care reform that appears race neutral are race conscious when looked deep down. African Americans in the United States benefit from the universal health care coverage, but also have to bear the cost control effects of the healthcare. The article also shows that the power of the insurance industry and major lobbyists on the provisions of the universal health care system exceeds that of the minority communities. He suggests moving from cost versus coverage nexus to the preventive care versus treatment, for the benefit of the minorities which usually land up in emergency rooms. He also explains that African Americans should know the depths of universal health care system directly and transparently. He supports economically benefiting of health maintenance organizations to improve current scenarios. People aim to have a free access of the universal health care. However, as what was said by Myers, people should deeply evaluate it first. Of course, a person will not aim for something he does not know enough. He will assess it first. On the other hand, it is good if the government, who has the authority, would be the one to lead the assessing part of freeing the universal health care among Americans. The government should weigh both sides. After all, the decision depends on the authority. Ilya Petrou (2011), Senior Correspondent in Dermatology Times and also an M.D, shares the views of a renowned dermatologist, David M. Pariser, M.D., F.A.C.P., F.A.A.D., past president of the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) on healthcare reform. Dr. Pariser considers healthcare reform a positive change, but not so beneficial to physicians and their patients. He adds that the physician community in general had least interference in the healthcare reform, unlike insurance companies and hospitals. He talks about the 10-year fix for the sustainable growth rate that allows the doctors to plan their practices and do business planning, Medicare’s’ interferences with the quality standards and physicians’ compensation. However, he estimates that the independent payment advisory board may marginalize the work of the dermatologists, thus affecting their patients. It is not true that physicians and their patients as well will not have the most benefits of freeing the universal health care. This is because they are the main prospect of the said program. Identity or any position will not be a requirement upon having the access of it. Everyone will be seen as equal with each other. If some specialist are against of it for they will be paid less, when it comes to practicality, they will feel more stress due to heavy number of patients. However, every patient counts another amount from the government. It is not just healing without payment. The government is the one who will be in charge of it. It is still business and not a friendly conversation. Charles Scaliger (2010) reported that ObamaCare is a destroyer of free-market medical care, which is prevalent in the United States for almost a century. He regarded free-market medical care as more opportunistic to everybody involved with the healthcare reform. He considers American healthcare system to be government controlled since long, and found it inefficient, leading bad consequences for physicians and patients. He also believes that the universal healthcare offers incentives to mislead lifestyle choices, and disincentives to healthier lifestyles. He imagines that removing governmental interferences would lead to better affordable pricing by healthcare professionals, cheap premiums by insurance companies, and higher salaries without paid benefits by employers. Offering a free universal health care will not mislead people but lead them to a brighter future. Health is the main issue for this and health is connected to one’s life. If the government would only look to the bad side of the said program, then of course, no free universal health care would happen. Helping someone, mostly the poor and marginalize, is a good way of serving the people. It is not just a simple “free” thing that the society asks for. It is actually dreams that are about to happen if being helped by the authority. It is not just money but life. Lowell S. Levin (1994), professor of Public Health at Yale University, gives direction that helps to move to the World Health Organization’s goal of “Health for All”. Free and universal medical care contributes fewer benefits to the population’s health. Even though health care reform is necessary, the nation’s health is not promoted through such reform. There should be more debates on how to improve health, as compared to how to make health insurance affordable to all. A population-based perspective shows the overwhelming negative effect of social factors such as poverty, chronic unemployment, low educational achievement, poor housing, and environmental degradation on health. Medical care is a necessary resource, but not a desirable one. Levin suggests that the medical insurance debate must be widened, and to liberate health from its current identity with medical care, the health investments should move from diagnosis and treatment to prevention and health promotion. Considering the universal health care is actually focusing on how to improve the health itself. Having a universal health care program and making it free will prevent the more causable effect of such sickness. Many people do not look on the deeper meaning of doing such program. People, most of the time, forget to evaluate the scenario deeply. The authority only focuses on what is behind and not to the things that are way to come. The people should be ready thus the government should make them ready. Many oppose the program without even deeply evaluating it first. Freeing the universal health care is not just something that will benefit certain group of people but all. It aims to help each and every one in the society. The program equalizes the people. There are no professional or unprofessional who will not benefit from it. As what was Turka and Caplan (2010) said that health insurance is not a luxury, but it is a right. The lengthy Congressional logjam provides opportunity for open debates. And, although other opinions are acknowledged, universal health insurance coverage is highly accepted. With 50 million Americans uninsured, it is morally pathetic to equal health care access for all. The price of the uninsured is crowded emergency rooms, poor health indices, and higher mortality. Ethical imperative as the requirement for justice is compelling for universal health care coverage. Many object to calls for universal coverage for cost, intrusion in freedom of choice, and demand for more individual responsibility. But they do support universal education, which is the right for all Americans. Despite many failures in the education system, people try to ensure that a decent education is available to all. Similarly, equal opportunity to be healthy is equally imperative as equal opportunity to be educated. It is not okay to be not okay in a sense that you are suffering for a certain disease and you cannot have any access to be healed because you are not insured and even do not have a certain amount. The American should free the universal health care so that people will have the chance to prove their selves among the other nations. Americans are not weak but strong and educated. The United States of America has the potential to compete to other nations. Just like the other known countries that have a free universal health care, Americans should do the same thing also. It does not bring any harm but a better future for everyone. Universal health care is a view where everyone, who belongs to a certain place, is covered with basic health amenities and would not be denied of any health related needs as what was defined by Torrey (2008). American should have a free universal health care. If the government would agree to free people on having an access to universal health care, advantages are visible. Freeing the universal health care would encourage the people to start preventive medicines and avoid major health problems. Also, people will have a peace of mind while working part time or be stay-at-home for they are already insured with their health. Lastly, medical professionals can concentrate on patients rather than worrying about the insurance paperwork and other formalities that they are oblige to process just to make sure of their health insurance. There are several queries and debates about the issue of freeing the universal health care in the United States. This paper is proof having a free universal health care. People are worthy of having their rights of being a healthy citizen of the country thus, freeing the universal health care will be a great help for everyone. Freeing it will demonstrate equality among the citizens of the United States, no poor and no rich, all are equal. References Armstrong, E. (2012). The Unsung Benefits of Universal Health Care. Citizen’s Advisory, 161(3), 3-7. Blevins, R. (2012). What Universal Healthcare Means to Americans. OEN, 1. Retrieved from http://www.opednews.com/articles/What-Universal-Healthcare-by-Richard-Blevins-120629- 114.html. Greenberger, N. J., Davies, N. E., Maynard, E. P., & Wallerstein, R. O. (1990, May 1). Universal Access to Health Care in America: A Moral and Medical Importance. Annals of Internal Medicine. pp. 637-638. Retrieved from EBSCOHost database. Johnson, A. (2010, September 17). Recession Swells Number of Uninsured to 50.7 Million. Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition. p. A4. Retrieved from ProQuest database. Lavidge, K. (2008). Does Universal Healthcare Make Everyone’s Life Better? Qn. Retrieved from http://qn.som.yale.edu/content/does-universal-healthcare-make-everyones-life- better. Levin, L. S. (1994). If medicine doesn't affect health much, what does?. Social Policy, 24(4), 46. Retrieved from EBSCOHost database. Myers, S. (2010). Race-Conscious Policy Analysis and the Healthcare Reform Debate. Review Of Black Political Economy, 37(3/4), 203-206. doi:10.1007/s12114-010-9067-x. Retrieved from EBSCOHost database. Petrou, I. (2011). Examining healthcare reform. Dermatology Times, 3-5. Retrieved from EBSCOHost database. Pibel, D., & Gelder, S. (2006). Health Care: It’s What Ails Us. Yes, 1. Retrieved from http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/health-care-for-all/health-care-its-what-ails-us. Scaliger, C. (2010). Promising Path for Reform: Considering that healthcare in America has been largely regulated and paid for by the government for decades and that ObamaCare is more of the same, what should be done?. New American (08856540), 26(10), 23. Retrieved from EBSCOHost database. Sykora, J. (2010). What Are The Benefits Of A Universal Health Care System? Livestrong.com. Retrieved from http://www.livestrong.com/article/158282-what-are-the-benefits-of-a-universal-health-care-system/. Torrey, T. (2008, October 16). What is the health care coverage?. Retrieved November 24, 2012 from http://patients.about.com/od/healthcarereform/a/universal.htm Turka, L. A., & Caplan, A. L. (2010, April). The right to health care. Journal of Clinical Investigation. p. 934. Retrieved from EBSCOHost database. Read More