The system of health insurance emerged gradually in the States at the beginning of the twentieth century and significantly spread all over by the nation by the middle of the twentieth century. The beneficial effects of such systems are undeniable, they allow access to care and 'equity in health'; now these benefits seems to be widespread.
In this way, people can enjoy the right to be treated consistently and in a timely manner; especially in the industrialized countries, all citizens can demand to be treated, it is their genuine right. However, given the rapid evolution of human societies, health insurance systems, which weigh heavy in the gross domestic product and state budgets constantly, need to be renovated in order to be more efficient and be the best in terms of quality and reimbursement of care.
Indeed, if we observe the case of the United States of America, we see the great debate that stirred the entire country on the reforms of the health insurance system initiated by the current President, Barack Obama. This was also one of the flagship campaign promises he had made when he was elected as President in November 2008.
Tags: US Health System, US Health Insurance, US healthcare industry
[...] and then analyze the deep divisions that exist on the subject (II). This will allow us to understand the different social visions of America. The reform necessary for true universal access to care Indeed, the current situation of the United States in the area of health is not very promising. There are nearly 46 million Americans who lack health coverage. This is due to the shortcomings of the system. There is actually the superimposition of public insurance (covering about 80 million Americans) and private insurance. [...]
[...] The benefits of such systems are undeniable. They allow access to care, and provides "equity in health" benefits that now seem to be commonplace. Thus, the right to be treated in a timely manner and uniform care for all can now be treated as a natural right, especially in industrialized countries. However, given the rapid evolution of human societies, the health insurance systems, which weigh heavy in the gross domestic product and state budgets, have the constant need to be renovated to be more effective, as well as to be effective in terms of the quality of care and reimbursement. [...]
[...] However, there is some reluctance in the Democratic camp. Indeed, some fear reform that would lead to too great an increase in the deficit of the U.S. government, and higher taxes. The Republican Party, which is much more conservative on the ideological and economic liberalism, takes up these arguments by adding the cost, associated to this huge reform according to them (one trillion dollars over 10 years).In addition, they opine that this state interventionism, if increased suddenly, could be fatal, given the country's economy. [...]
[...] Para-statals, including Medicaid, are reserved only for use by the poorest segments of the U.S. population, excluding the classes which are considered "too rich" (which are in fact the middle classes). The obligation is to ensure support through private insurance or by the public body MEDICARE (which is too frail to ensure support for everyone). We must note that private insurers are allowed to adjust their premiums according to the probability of health risks of the insured. It is a kind of bonus / penalty depending on who controls the physical strength of the insured. [...]
[...] The weight of the lobby (including those of private health insurance) in the United States is indeed a point to be determined. Indicative Bibliography Information report following a mission to the United States, the U.S. health care system and its reform proposals, Senate / 1994 The U.S. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
