A Case for Universal Healthcare
Introduction
Benjamin Rush, a signee for the declaration of independence, once noted that “Unless we put medical freedom intoConstitutionution the time will come when medicine will organize itself into an undercover dictatorship. To restrict the art of healing to doctors and deny equal privileges to others will constitute the Bastille of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic” (US Senate, 141). The statement rings true more so today when citizens have to endure higher out of the pocket costs and costly insurance. Amid the Corona Virus outbreak countries integrating universal healthcare implemented better pandemic response than countries with other types of intervention. Seville and Lehren reported that the United States has a fragmented healthcare system, and, in times of crisis without Universal healthcare, holes are already evident in the impromptu safety net (5). Due to this fragmented system, patients have had to pay to private payers because they cannot prove they had the disease. Arguably, a nation should provide universal healthcare because it is a social contract for all. The universal agreement between people and the government purposes that people should have the best possible live/outcomes and reduce unnecessary deaths.
Enhanced Productivity
Firstly, a universal health system improves and prospers people and the government because, in this system, patients get continuous care regardless of pre-existing illnesses or affordability. The notions of productivity are essential with adequate health access because fewer people will spend their time at home as opposed to being at work due to protracted sickness. Those who are uninsured have shorter lifespans and hence a shorter time participating in the workforce. Health capital is a critical issue as noted Bloom, et al. (1) is crucial because “improving population health could accelerate economic growth by improving labor productivity, school attendance, educational attainment, cognitive function, capital accumulation, and fertility control.” The result of this augmented distribution could be crucial for a nation because, without adequate health access, adults have fewer years of participation in their occupations. Also, productivity could reduce substantially for children because children without proper health may have illnesses that cause developmental issues. These issues are important to note because reduced productivity has an overall effect on the economy. Also, lack of universal health translates to more adverse impacts on the general population due to non-communicable diseases such as depression and other mental health conditions that lessen quality life (Rajgopal, 63). Indeed people with lacAccessccess to care have emotional trauma, which translates to productivity losses through absenteeism or lower employee morale. Therefore, productivity increases when therAccessccess to universal healthcare, regardless of condition or insurance status. Equally important, valuing people’s health is necessary not because of productivity benefits but because of the humanity and morality of equal healthcare access.
Morality in Universal Healthcare
Secondly, humanity is an imperative aspect of living. Hence, healthcare should be universal because it is immoral for a government to treat health as an economic as opposed to social good. Based on these ethical notions, then comprehensive care is pertinent because t working populations have poor physical and emotional health that lead to miserable lives. As a result of lacking optimum health, thousands of people die even from treatable conditions. A report by the Kaiser Family Foundation reported that “in 2013, more than three-quarters of the uninsured population was in working families, with 71% in families with one or more full-time workers and 14% in families with part-time workers” (Majerol et al., 5). Among these families, the lack of insurance affects children, and minority families also avoid preventative services vital for better long-term outcomes. Existing research already notes the disjointed nature of healthcare where structural/systematic racism limits availability, accessibility, and utilization of healthcare services (Weng et al., 80). Therefore, most people become disadvantaged because the healthcare inequities are also influenced by social structures of money, power, and resources. When a government assesses these inequities and the consequences that result from a sound healthcare system, the most crucial decision is to provide such services to fulfill the social contract to citizens. At the same time, the United States should provide universal healthcare because it is an economically viable solution that augments health outcomes.
The Economical Aspect of Universal health
Another issue is that per capita, the United States government pays more for healthcare than any other industrialized nation. However, the United States among these countries has the lowest health metrics. Therefore, among developed nations, the United States is one of the countries that does not guarantee healthcare for citizens. According to Martin, the 4.8% maternal mortality rate in Canada is lower than the mortality 12.2% rate in the United States per 100,000 deaths (182). Not only do people lose their lives due to lack of universal health, but also lack of overall health results in numerous economic losses. These disjointed efforts create many hidden costs that lead to the government losing more money. Miller et al. (1) noted that the uninsured’ financial losses result in losses of over 65 to 130 billion dollars per year. These losses occur due to the surpassed debts that the government pays (bad debt) to the provider. Also, the uninsured pay 35% out of pocket costs compared to 20% for the insured, a severe difference that also affects acquiring other social resources such as housing and food, especially for uninsured and terminally ill. These costs translate to severe losses for both individuals and public expenditure, meaning that if the government incorporates universal care, there would be better tracking of these economic losses. Through an integrated health system, the government would effectively track these expenses and create a better method based on equity and not affordability. Indeed Martin (185) asserted that “the rate of increase in health care expenditures in the United States, expressed as percentages of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) greatly surpasses those of 17 other developed countries.” The costs, therefore, concerning the GDP in the United States, were 17.1% compared to Canada at 10.7% in 2013. These costs thus call for an immediate remediation for a different system that would lessen costs and augment the quality of life for all. Indeed, understanding these costs make a valid economic case for why the United States ought to adopt a universal healthcare system. With this in mind, it is also vital to evaluate how universal healthcare would enhance the effectiveness of the entire health system.
Overall Effectiveness
In the final analysis, it is crucial to note that using universal healthcare reduces fragmented ineffectiveness caused by diverse healthcare systems. Williams (644) research explores the issues of effectiveness due to a lack of universal healthcare. The current system in the United States leads to unnecessary use of emergency room services (ER). ER services costs the government cost the government about $383, while physician visits are much lower at $60. The issue of ER is critical because many people still go to the emergency room even for non-emergencies. Friebel (e000944) additionally noted that “standardizing clinical assessments through checklists ensures that patients at risk of developing complications are identified early on, in turn allowing for a need-based treatment response and an ultimately improved quality of patient care.” However, there are risks to primary care under unstructured healthcare systems because infectiveness can result in a lack of integration with the entire healthcare system. The consequence is that the current system increases mortality levels in the long-run due to lacking service beyond primary care settings. As such, a universal system is essential not just for reasons identified before but also for overall effectiveness, which would reduce disjointed efforts and attain better outcomes. Given these points above, a universal system would benefit the United States and make healthcare more effective.
Conclusion
In summary, this paper deliberated on the benefits of having a universal healthcare system in the United States as opposed to the current disjointed system where the government and private insurance companies provide healthcare. The case for a comprehensive healthcare system stems from the ideal of healthcare becoming integrated in the Constitutioution so that private payers cannot manipulate and cause inequality in gaining healthcare. The case for a universal health system, in general, leads to more productivity, especially at workplaces, where people who are more likely to be uninsured have higher mental illnesses that cause low morale and absenteeism. The second issue is that providing equitable health is moral because some people are more disadvantaged than others in the general population. Universal healthcare can become less costly for the government, and thus universal healthcare is not only socially advantageous but economically viable. By incorporating a single-payer system, the government will reduce increasing costs, which by 2013 accounted for 17.1% of the GDP. Universal health would also overcome disjointed ineffectiveness in the sector, especially in emergency room services and primary care. Therefore, this paper supports the universal healthcare system because it will benefit everyone and eradicate what Benjamin Rush called undercover dictatorship aspects that are not only un-American but despotic. By providing universal healthcare, the government shall fulfill a social contract with the people and mitigate unnecessary deaths while augmenting the citizens’ quality of life.
Works Cited
Bloom, David E., Alexander Khoury, and Ramnath Subbaraman. “The promise and peril of universal health care.” Science 361.6404 (2018): eaat9644.
Friebel, Rocco, et al. “Achieving high-quality universal health coverage: a perspective from the National Health Service in England.” BMJ global health 3.6 (2018): e000944.
Majerol, Melissa, Vann Newkirk, and Rachel Garfield. “The uninsured: A primer.” Key facts about health insurance and the uninsured in the era of health reform. Washington, DC: The Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation Commission on the Uninsured (2015).
Martin, George M. “Views on the ethical struggle for universal, high quality, affordable health care and its relevance for gerontology.” Experimental gerontology 87 (2017): 182-189.
Miller, Wilhelmine, Elizabeth Richardson Vigdor, and Willard G. Manning. “Covering The Uninsured: What Is It Worth? An attempt to place a value on what it costs a person, and society, when health insurance is lacking.” Health Affairs 23.Suppl1 (2004): W4-157.
Rajgopal, T. “Mental well-being at the workplace.” Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicine 14.3 (2010): 63.
Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Access to Medical Treatment Act. United States Senate. Free access e-book. 141.
Weng, Suzie S., and Warren T. Wolfe III. “Asian American and Health inequities.” Public Health, Social work, and Health Inequalities: 79.
Annotated Bibliography
Bloom, David E., Alexander Khoury, and Ramnath Subbaraman. “The promise and peril of universal health care.” Science 361.6404 (2018): eaat9644.
Summary: Bloom et al. evaluate and conceptualize healthcare in a way that would be most valuable for all people in a universal healthcare system. The researchers posit that Universal Healthcare is gaining popularity all over the world. Thus infrastructure and structural changes are necessary if the goal to provide equitable care for all is to be realized. The single-payer system, according to the researchers, has the capability of not only productivity but also enhancing positive outcomes to attain the World health Organization meaning of healthcare. With this in mind, the researcher argues that universal health is not only morally accurate but also a human right. Not only this, the need to attain these goals related to the overall social contract government has with the citizenry and, most importantly, an obligation to provide health and wellbeing at the macro and micro level of government.
Assess: This source is vital because it provides a mechanism to understand how universal health can augment productivity.
Reflect: While this source incorporates a broader view of a need for universal health, Bloom et al. provide critical benefits for why Universal healthcare is vital for increasing productivity.
Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Access to Medical Treatment Act. United States Senate. Free access e-book. 141.
Summary: Details how the United States Senate includedAccessccess to medical treatment act in 1994. At the beginning of the session, Senate echoes Benjamin Rush’s words about the need to make healthcare a right and not as an economic good.
Assess: Besides the quote, this research does not provide other necessary details about this paper because political Acts and regulations have implemented the current health system as it stands.
Assess: Even today, Benjamin Rush’s quote is vital and crucial for this review because it is this quote that the entire research is grounded.
Friebel, Rocco, et al. “Achieving high-quality universal health coverage: a perspective from the National Health Service in England.” BMJ global health 3.6 (2018): e000944.
Summary: Friebel at al. assess how developing nations can integrate equality and equity in healthcare access through a universal healthcare system. The authors argue that effectiveness is a crucial metric that determines uptake of care among nations. For example, they note that some of the health resources (ER and primary) in the United States and the United Kingdom are not used effectively to create quality outcomes. However, the article notes that developing countries must understand priority-based settings to mitigate the waste of resources. Most importantly, they note that evaluating providers is also a key metric for advancing more equitable universal health.
Assess: Friebel et al. provide an authoritative research article on how the government should minimize ineffectiveness in delivering care. The significance of this research is that it shows that under current systems, universal health can be achieved from these disjointed systems.
Reflect: The source fits with the last subtopic because effectiveness is needed if the United States government is to acquire univeAccessccess of care.
Majerol, Melissa, Vann Newkirk, and Rachel Garfield. “The uninsured: A primer.” Key facts about health insurance and the uninsured in the era of health reform. Washington, DC: The Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation Commission on the Uninsured (2015).
Summary: Majerol et al., through the Kaiser Foundation, give an insight into the world of the uninsured. The review is an evaluation of the differences in healthcare access through insurance that demonstrates why providing universal health is moral issues. Among the key points, they discourse disadvantaged families in accessing optimum health and how minorities and children are impacted by the lack of social resources that provide upward mobility. The authors, however, assert that Medicaid expanded programs for those disadvantaged, although they do argue that the safety net is still limiting in regards to the extent of healthcare access, availability, and utilization.
Assess: This source provides a general understanding of the inequity that private insurance causes and how Medicaid and other public services are not optimum to offer a comprehensive health plan.
Reflect: Majerol et al. give a glimpse into healthcare access as concerns insurance and how lack of insurance limits healthcare access making it a crucial study for questioning the morality of the current system.
Martin, George M. “Views on the ethical struggle for universal, high quality, affordable health care and its relevance for gerontology.” Experimental gerontology 87 (2017): 182-189.
Summary: Martin compares the United States health system with that of Canada and the United Kingdom and other developed nations. The review is perhaps the most crucial because it makes a case for why universal health is pertinent by comparing to these nations. In particular, the research shows that the United States private and public healthcare insurance leaves a lot to desires mainly based on the expenses of healthcare about the Gross Domestic Product. By showing the critical difference in the expenditure between nations, the reader can only understand why, compared to the United States, Canada performs better (single-payer system).
Assess: Martin’s article is primary and vital for this research because it provides the most significant economic case for the need to integrate universal healthcare.
Reflect: The research is one of the most important because Martin compares diverse developed countries with different healthcare systems, and among all the United States falls behind even though the author does assert that the United States spends the most on healthcare.
Rajgopal, T. “Mental well-being at the workplace.” Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicine 14.3 (2010): 63.
Summary: Rajgopal asserts that mental health is a crucial determinant of health today and that it occurs more often in a modern dynamic workplace. As a result, employees who are mentally ill become prone to other severe comorbidities, including hypertension and other cardiovascular conditions. Mental health is an essential determinant of productivity in the workplace because mental health comes overrepresented number of absence from work and low morale. As such, universal healthcare is vital because it would reduce the likelihood of lost productivity and profits and permanently augment better life outcomes for the modern workforce. The author further asserts that most office-related sick leave that relate to company losses, and therefore, national revenue occurs due to 30% to 40% sick-leaves that often lead to loss of crucial employees. The importance of this research is how the author connects mental illness with lost productivity and a need for a better model of care.
Assess: Rajgopal’s article supports information concerning lost productivity and how it not only impacts on people but the government. Notably, the author incorporates the need for mental health programs that will increase productivity and contribute to community wellness.
Reflect: The research fits into this research because it asserts the need to evaluate occupational mental health, not just a company program but a public health issue.
Miller, Wilhelmine, Elizabeth Richardson Vigdor, and Willard G. Manning. “Covering The Uninsured: What Is It Worth? An attempt to place a value on what it costs a person, and society, when health insurance is lacking.” Health Affairs 23.Suppl1 (2004): W4-157.
Summary: The research by Miller et al. is crucial because it is a publication of health affairs and hence reports on trends in healthcare in the United States. The authors indicate that the uninsured cost the government not only in terms of $65–$130 billion but also due to the lost health capital. Notably, they note that there are additional costs the government has to pay, including spillover costs. These costs include the services in Medicare, disability, and disability. The aggravating issue is that private insurance has not alleviated underinsurance because it has made the situation worse for medium to low-income families.
Assess: The research fits into this research because the authors affirm that the current system is not working as it is either too expensive for all to buy and that the costs are more aggravated for the government.
Reflect: The significance of this topic is that it answered to the issue of economic subtopic and the need for a more comprehensive healthcare system.
US Senate
Weng, Suzie S., and Warren T. Wolfe III. “Asian American and Health inequities.” Public Health, Social work, and Health Inequalities: 79.
Summary: Weng et al. focus on the health of the Asian minority population and assert that there are numerous barriers to service utilization, especially in healthcare. The authors in this article indicate that gaiAccessccess to care is not only within healthcare, but restrictions to use are caused by other social factors, including social resources such as power and money that also affect the uptake of better mental health services. The authors then develop a framework for understanding these barriers and how they relate to the affordability of healthcare. Indeed the Asian community is perceived to be more wealthy and healthy. However, these perceptions do not account for the overall population. Indeed, the researchers also offer that attitudes are also crucial to understanding why they face more barriers. Asians also have issues of culture, language, discrimination that further augment underutilization of health.
Assess: Weng and colleagues’ research is thus essential in understanding why univeAccessccess is crucial because Asian communities have numerous barriers that would impact on care and equitAccessccess.
Reflect: Particularly, this research supports the morality of universal healthcare by noting differences in all aspects of life between the mainstream and the minority communities. Health is an integral measure of health and ought to be provided to all cities and mainly those with other socio-economic barriers and cultural differences.