Can we therefore compare the Health care systems in these two areas? It will be an underestimation trying to compare the two because the rural system has a bundle of steps to tackle in order to at least reduce a bit of the gap between the two. The rural people are liable for their health care costs nearly 22% more than the urban dwellers. The insurance level of the urban occupants is 70% higher than the rural areas residents. This clearly suggests that the actuarial rate of heath policies by rural residents is far much inferior to that of the urban inhabitants.
This also interprets that any health care provision that is based on present employer sponsored health insurance system will not apply to the rural areas residents become of the composition of their economy. This issue can be solved by creating a uniform insurance health coverage system to both the rural and urban dwellers (Bailey 2009). The issue of rising premiums should be addressed because it discourages the few in the rural areas and some in the urban areas who are undertaking the insurance program.
There are too many deductions reflected on the service delivery plus less coverage. The unfortunate in the society who own small businesses in the rural areas should be considered to avoid a replica of the same problems year after year. Much of the subsidies are received in the urban areas and this is a great issue that affects the health department in the country. Dependency and need in relation to the Public Health Insurance Plans The Public Health Insurance plans are dependent on donations and aids from various sources.
It is worse in the rural areas where the population comprises of poor and the weak people who contribute very little in the society. The public health care system is not keen to provide efficient services to them but rather shift their attention to the able and rich in the urban areas. Studies have indicated that since 1987 to date, (24years later) the elderly in the society covered by public health insurers has only increased by only 122% (Worley, Prideaux, Strasser, et al. 2000). On the other hand the ones in the urban areas exceed this three times.
The health insurers apply the use the idea of taxes to cover people’s health. This is not effective enough especially in terms of cost because the cost of expanding health care facilities is three times higher than the tax the taxes being paid. Legislations should be put in place to reform the public programs which the poor people depend on. The poor people cannot afford the private health care plans and entirely depend on the Public Health Insurance. This public sector should ensure that it engages in a healthy competition in order to provide quality services even to the rich.
If they don’t provide quality services the rich, who apparently are the main contributors to this industry will shift their attention to the private sector to get value for their money leaving the poor and old with no alternatives but be on the mercy of service providers who do not feel worthy providing services to the low income earners but simple volunteers who report on duty when they feel like. The Health Care Delivery System The existing Health Care System in the rural areas can simply be described as strained and hassled.
It is simply a chain of small dispensaries, nursing homes and clinics that are challenged by financial constraints (Worley, Prideaux, Strasser, et al 2000). This is different from the prestigious, fully equipped health facilities in the urban areas that rarely experience financial difficulties but rather have excess profits which are shifted to re-equipping the hospitals. The facilities here are no match to the ones in the rural areas that rely on the mercy of donations from well wishers. Technological upgrades are not possible in these areas as a result of the little funds available for the same.
The creation of qualified rural health care system is yet to be achieved by the service providers.
Read More