Effectiveness of Universal Healthcare System - Essay Example

The Case For Universal Healthcare No other issue surrounding the current presidential race has garnered more attention than healthcare. There are as many plans as there are candidates and there are emotionally charged opinions on all sides. The healthcare system has been ravaged by exploding costs and a lack of access for millions of Americans. Efforts to make changes to the system have resulted in characterizations of becoming socialized medicine or having our medical care come under the control of the government. These charges and counter-charges over-simplify the complexities of providing adequate medical care for the American public. Yet, the issue of universal healthcare can be openly debated on its own merits without being complicated by politics or social concerns. Universal healthcare is simply the advocacy that all American citizens are entitled to some form of healthcare. Universal healthcare is morally correct, affordable, and is a program that should be immediately implemented into our healthcare system. Everyone is entitled to the care of their basic health needs without regards to their ability to pay for it. This does not mean socialized medicine or that the government bureaucracy in Washington will be making your medical decisions. It simply means that the government will be mandating and subsidizing private health insurance for all Americans. If we limit health care based on financial status then we would restrict this necessity to only the economically elite. Health care is as critical to life as food, water, and shelter. These minimal necessities to life should be made available to everyone. To deny a simple life-saving operation to a four-year old girl would be unthinkable. Yet, we allow this to happen to millions of poverty stricken adults who are unable to afford insurance. The fact that all people have a right to the basic necessities of life is one of our core American values. It has been said that if small business owners are forced to provide health insurance for their employees, they would not be able to compete and would need to lay off workers. However, rather than costing small and medium sized businesses additional money to purchase insurance, the program would be economically beneficial by creating a healthier workforce. When workers are healthier there is a lower rate of absenteeism and greater productivity. The disruption caused by ill employees costs the company in terms of lost production and additional overtime to cover the missing worker. Having the employees on the job, even a few additional days a year, could cover a significant portion of the insurance cost. In addition, good physical health contributes to good mental health and a happier workforce is more productive. By furnishing all the employees in small and medium sized businesses with health insurance companies could experience a net positive gain for the business owner. The health care dollars saved by having full coverage for all Americans would surpass the cost of implementing the program. In today's system, everyone eventually gets the necessary health care they need. However, many wait until the illness becomes chronic or dictates expensive treatment regimens. In addition, the emergency room has become the clinic of choice for many people that are uninsured. The taxpayer is then faced with these high medical bills that are covered through local, state, and federal programs. If the people had insurance they would be more likely to consult a doctor when the first signs of an illness presented themselves. This would save the already stretched resources of the emergency rooms and allow for a lower cost treatment. Though the cost of subsidizing the health insurance of the poor has been estimated to cost up to $1 trillion per year, this would be easily saved by reducing the number of chronic illness treatments and the inappropriate emergency room visits. Early treatment, for diseases such as cancer, can greatly reduce costs but many of those could even be eliminated by the institution of wellness programs. Since the taxpayer is directly footing the bill for the insurance, they would be in a better position to lobby for good health. The government could mandate participation in programs that promote exercise, good diet, or smoking cessation. This becomes even more important with our children. The health and health habits we acquire as children will impact us for a lifetime. Children who are able to see a doctor regularly will be less prone to illness as an adult. The national need for health care would eventually decline. If children are fed a healthy diet when they are young, they will learn to enjoy and continue to eat healthy for their entire lifetime. Smoking and substance abuse could be treated as a health condition and would reduce the ill effects of these activities. Heart disease, cancer, and diabetes would be less prevalent if children were able to get off to a healthy start. Good diet, exercise, and elimination of harmful habits all contribute to lower health care costs. Universal health care would allow the government to educate the public and dictate participation in a wellness program. Along with the economic savings of universal health care it would also promote a better quality of care. If health care were universal there would be more financial incentive for locating hospitals and clinics in the poorer neighborhoods that need them the most. Currently, many citizens do not have access to health care simply because they do not have transportation to a health care clinic. Clinics could be built on a regional or community basis without the demographic demands of locating in a high income area. These local clinics have the opportunity of providing a higher quality of care since they would be familiar with the local population. They could focus on local cultural traditions regarding medical care and be in a better position to treat race specific diseases. For example, a local clinic might be better equipped to diagnose sickle-cell anemia if its clients were a majority African-American. Customs regarding illness and disease can vary greatly from culture to culture. When the clinics are more local, they can bring in a diverse staff that are familiar and can accommodate the different views regarding disease and death. When all citizens have insurance, the clinics will be more evenly distributed and more locally based. Access to the clinic, treating specific diseases, and understanding the role of culture in health care all go towards improving the quality of care. Opponents of universal health care have argued that the mandatory nature of it makes it un-American and undermines the free market. They say that it is one more government mandated regulation that we don't need. While it may be true that the government is already over-intrusive in the marketplace, universal healthcare is no different from the mandatory automobile insurance or the life insurance on a mortgage that people are currently required to carry. In addition, the public already shares the protection costs and benefits of our safety and our property. We have universal protection from harm through our fire departments and law enforcement agencies. Our health should be no less valuable than our real estate. It is already mandated that we insure our motor vehicles, our homes, and our public safety. Universal healthcare would simply add public health to that list. In conclusion, the failure to cover the basic needs of anyone's health is morally wrong. Universal health care would insure that good health does not become the sole property of the wealthy. This program does not take the medical decisions out of the hands of the medical community. It is simply a plan to get everyone covered under an insurance program. While employers may see it as expensive upon the initial examination, the modest cost would be largely absorbed through a more productive workforce. Subsidizing the poor would be paid by saving the enormous amounts of money that the taxpayer currently spends on emergency care and expensive treatments. Universal healthcare could promote better health through wellness programs, and local clinics could deliver a higher quality of care. It is not a question of the government intruding on our right to choose our own health care plan, it is simply saying that the public's health is everyone's responsibility. Universal healthcare is affordable, manageable, and an idea whose time has come. Read More