Healthcare should be Universal

Healthcare should be Universal

            The inquiry regarding whether healthcare should be universal or not requires balancing between the healthcare needs of the country and costs. In a country where cancer cases among men and women will increase by 24% and 21% respectively by 2020, getting a balance between the proposing and opposing ends of universal healthcare will be essential (CDC Expected). Requiring that those who are likely to be sick such as the elderly and those with chronic illness pay more, will alleviate the unfair weight on healthy persons who seem mandated to pay for others.

Background

The debate on universal healthcare proves significant as it advocates for health insurance for all citizens in a country. The healthcare debate gained rise amid rising health issues among the population. Most health issues get attributed to modern lifestyles and pollution. Notably, 4.8% of the US population do not access healthcare due to its associated costs (CDC Access). The population is significant when one looks into the implementation of the ACA in 2010 that got pioneered as improving healthcare coverage in the US. Getting the best healthcare coverage comes out as a necessity and not an option. CDC Expected estimates that cancer cases would increase by 24% and 21% among men and women respectively by the end of the year 2020. Universal healthcare in the US has been a source of proposing and opposing debates. While the proposers advocate for universal healthcare, especially since it will give every American citizen access to healthcare, those opposing the notion present their opinions of the same. Looking into both aspects will be essential to get a comprehensive view.

Proposing Argument

The benefits of universal healthcare include lower health costs, advises the public on healthy choices, and standardized services. Having universal healthcare means that there will be lower costs on health services as everyone contributes towards the pool. With appropriate coverage, everyone provides, although only those who fall sick would gain the most by having their bills paid (Greer and Mendez 37). However, the amounts they pay would get reduced than if they did not have coverage. The presence of universal healthcare means that authorities and insurance companies involved would do more to ensure that people receive advice on the best plans. The same happens in the marketplace where citizens sort through healthcare plans and can get help to find those that suit them most (Greer and Mendez 38). Inequality in healthcare existed for decades, and universal healthcare minimizes this extensively. Notably, ensuring that everyone gets covered means that both the rich and poor receive health services. With coverage, quality healthcare reaches affordable hence standardized services across the divide. Thus, universal healthcare is the best approach where it provides regulated healthcare, affordable health services, and sufficient advice given to the public on efficient coverage plans.

Opposing Argument

Those opposing universal healthcare points to unfairness as healthy people pay for coverage and limit patient care accuracy. Using the comprehensive healthcare approach means that most people will contribute to healthcare costs. In the US, 91.5% of the population in the US had healthcare coverage at one point (Berchick et al.). It is not everyone that falls sick. The fact holds although everyone will contribute to the universal healthcare coverage. Admittedly, healthy persons pay for sick people’s healthcare costs. Assuming an individual contracts cancer due to smoking, his/her poor lifestyle leading to health complications will get footed by another healthy citizen who chose a healthy lifestyle. A universal care system forces doctors to handle more patients or clients with limited pay (Faizi and Kazmi 169). This reduces motivation among doctors and other healthcare workers as they focus on finishing the high number of clients as early as possible, thus watering down the quality of services. The extents of universal healthcare prove to be a burden on paying patients where they gamble on whether they will use the coverage, and even then, the accuracy of patient care diminishes.

Annotated Bibliography (Common Ground)

Faizi, Nafis, and Kazmi Shahwar. Universal Health Coverage – There is more to it than Meets the Eye. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, vol. 6, no. 1, 2017, pp. 169-170.

The article looks into the unsaid factors concerning universal healthcare. The common ground regarding universal healthcare debate requires that citizens contribute some amount to the healthcare coverage. However, this should be limited to specific age brackets and the probability of falling sick. People with chronic diseases would add more than others who have never been admitted to the hospital (Faizi and Kazmi 170). Where the vulnerable population in healthcare such as elderly pay for coverage, it will be useful to them without hurting young and healthier individuals. The results will be fairness across the divide as healthcare coverage gets to the right people, and funds can be used to promote targeted and accurate patient care.

Conclusion

In conclusion, universal healthcare proves to be a benefit and a limitation where it standardizes healthcare and limits the accuracy of patient care, respectively. 4.8% of the population in the US does not have access to healthcare due to the cost factor, and universal healthcare ensures that the needs of such people get addressed. Universal healthcare lowers its costs and informs the public on the best choices, although it limits the quality and is unfair to healthy people who still pay for coverage. A common ground implies that the US requires those with higher chances of needing medical attention, such as the elderly and those with chronic illnesses, to pay more than healthy persons.

Works Cited

Berchick, Edward R. et al. Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2018. Census, 8 Nov. 2019, www.census.gov/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-267.html. Accessed 20 Mar. 2020.

CDC. Access to Healthcare, 2017, www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/access-to-health-care.htm. Accessed 20 Mar. 2020.

CDC. Expected New Cancer Cases and Deaths in 2020, 2018, www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/research/articles/cancer_2020.htm. Accessed 20 Mar. 2020.

Greer, Scott, L., and Mendez Claudio A. Universal Health Coverage: A Political Struggle and Governance Challenge. American Journal of Public Health, vol. 105, 2015, pp. 37-39.