Universal health care

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Universal health care is a health care system in which all residents of a geographic or political entity have their health care paid for, regardless of medical condition or financial status.^[1] Universal health care systems vary in what services are covered completely, covered partially, or not covered at all.

Contents 1 Funding of universal health care systems 2 Countries with universal health care 3 Support for universal health care 4 Opposition to universal health care 5 References 6 See also 6.1 Examples 6.2 Related topics 7 External links 7.1 Supporting universal health care 7.2 Opposing universal health care 7.3 Neutral

[edit] Funding of universal health care systems

Most European systems are financed through a mix of public and private contributions.^[2] The majority of universal health care systems are funded primarily by tax revenue (e.g. Portugal^[2]). Some nations, such as Germany, France^[3] and Japan^[4] employ a multi-payer system in which health care is funded by private and public contributions.

"Single-payer" describes a type of financing system in which a single entity, typically a government-run organization, acts as the administrator (or "payer") to collect all health care fees, and pay out all health care costs.^[5] Some advocates of universal health care assert that single-payer systems save money that could be used directly towards health care by reducing administrative waste.^[5] Denmark, Sweden, and Canada are some of the countries that employ single-payer financing of health care.^[4]

A distinction is also made between municipal and national healthcare funding. For example, one model is that the bulk of the healthcare is funded by the municipality, speciality healthcare is provided and possibly funded by a larger entity, such as a municipal co-operation board or the state, and the medications are paid by a state agency.

[edit] Countries with universal health care

Argentina,^[6] Australia,^[3][6] Austria,^[3] Belgium,^[3] Canada,^[3] Cuba,^[3] Denmark,^[3] Finland,^[3] France,^[3][6] Germany,^[3] Greece,^[6][7] Ireland,^[8] Israel,^[9] Italy,^[6][10] Japan,^[3] The Netherlands,^[3] New Zealand,^[3] Norway,^[3], Poland, Portugal,^[2] Russia,^[6] Saudi Arabia,^[6] Seychelles,^[11] South Korea^[6] Spain,^[3] Sri Lanka,^[12] Sweden,^[3] The Republic of China (Taiwan),^[3] and the United Kingdom^[3][6] are among many countries that have various types of universal health care systems.

Mexico,^[6] South Africa,^[3][6] and Thailand^[13] are among those nations attempting to implement universal health care systems.

In the United States, certain publicly funded health care programs help to provide for the elderly, disabled, military service familes and veterans, and the poor^[14] and federal law ensures public access to emergency services regardless of ability to pay;^[15] however, a system of universal health care has not been implemented. Massachusetts is attempting to implement a near-universal health care system by mandating that residents purchase health insurance by July 1, 2007.^[16]

[edit] Support for universal health care

Common arguments waged from supporters of universal health care systems are:

• Health care is a right^[17][18] or entitlement.^[19]
• Ensuring the health of all citizens benefits a nation economically.^[20]
• Provides coverage to all citizens regardless of ability to pay.^[21]
• Health care is increasingly unaffordable for businesses and individuals.^[21]
• Universal health care would provide for uninsured adults who may forego treatment needed for chronic health conditions.^[22]
• Providing access to medical treatment to those who cannot afford it themselves reduces the severity of epidemics by reducing the number of disease carriers.
• Reduces wastefulness and inefficiencies in the delivery of health care.^[21]
• Aligns incentives for investment in long term health-care productivity, preventive care, and better management of chronic conditions.^[23]
• Encourages patients to seek preventive care enabling problems to be detected and treated earlier.^[21]
• A centralized national database makes diagnosis and treatment easier for doctors.^[21]
• Medical professionals can concentrate on treating patients rather than on administrative duties.^[21]
• Profit-driven care leads to more deaths^[24] and is more expensive.^[25]
• Universal health care can act as a subsidy to business, at no cost to the business. The Big Three of U.S. car manufacturers cite health-care provision as a reason for their ongoing financial travails. The cost of health insurance to U.S. car manufacturers adds between USD 900 and USD 1,400 to each car made in the U.S.A.^[26]
• The profit motive adversely affects the cost and quality of health care.^[27]

[edit] Opposition to universal health care

Common arguments waged from opponents of universal health care systems are:

• Health care is not a right.^[28][29] Individuals no more have a right to be protected from natural phenomena as the government has the power to levitate individuals in defiance of gravity, which itself is an act of nature like old age and disease.^[30]
• Providing health care is not the responsibility of government.^[31]
• Increased waiting times, which can result in unnecessary deaths.^[28][32]
• Poorer quality of care.^[28][21]
• Unequal access and health disparities still exist in some universal health care systems.^[28]
• Government agencies are less efficient due to bureaucracy.^[21][28] Administrative duties, by doctors, are the result of medical centralization and over-regulation, and are not natural to the profession. In fact, before heavy regulation of the health care and insurance industries, doctor visits to the elderly, and free care, or low cost care to impoverished patients was common; governments regulated this form of charity out of existence.^[33] Universal health care plans will add more inefficiency to the medical system because of more bureaucratic oversight and more paperwork, which will lead to less doctor patient visits.^[34]
• Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity lead to greater cost control and effectiveness.^[21]
• Uninsured citizens can sometimes still receive emergency care from alternative sources such as nonprofits and government-run hospitals.^[21]
• Government-mandated procedures reduce doctor flexibility.^[21]
• Healthy people who take care of themselves have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc. ^[21]
• Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay dissuades many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession.^[21]
• Causes loss of insurance industry jobs and other business closures in the private sector.^[21]
• Eliminates a right to privacy between doctors and patients as governments demand power to oversee health of citizens.^[35]
• Empirical evidence on single payer insurance programs demonstrates that the cost exceeds the expectations of advocates.^[36]
• Governments, such as Canada, have outlawed medical care if the service is paid for by private individual funds. This results as governments attempt to control costs by gaining or enforcing monopsony power.^[37]

[edit] References

[edit] See also

[edit] Examples

• Medicare (Australia)
• Medicare (Canada)
• National Health Service (United Kingdom)

[edit] Related topics

• Health savings account
• Medical savings account
• Medicare (United States)
• Two-tier health care
• Chapter 58

[edit] External links

[edit] Supporting universal health care

• American Medical Student Association (AMSA)
• Connecticut Coalition for Universal Health Care
• Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP)
• Universal Health Care Action Network (UHCAN)
• Universal Health Care / National Health Insurance

[edit] Opposing universal health care

• Americans for Free Choice in Medicine (AFCM)
• Capitalism Magazine
• The Problems with Socialized Health Care from Mark Valenti's Liberty Page

[edit] Neutral

• BalancedPolitics.org - "Should the Government Provide Free Universal Health Care for All Americans?"