More handpicked essays just for you.
Current health care issues in the united states essay
A reflection paper on healthcare in the united states
Canada health care system strengths and weaknesses
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The introductory of Canada’s health care system in the mid-20th century, known as Medicare, led the country into the proud tradition of a public health care system, opposite to America’s privatized health care system in the south. Though Canada’s health care system still holds some aspects of a privatized system, it is still readily available for all citizens throughout the nation. After continuous research, it is clear to state that public health care and the association it has with welfare state liberalism is by far a more favourable option for Canada, than that of private health care and the association it has with neo-conservatism. To help understand why public health care is a better and more favourable option for Canada, it is fundamental …show more content…
The public health care system in Canada is still flawed, proven through the wait times that many patients have to go through. Canadians may wait up to six to nine months for “non-urgent” MRIs . The waiting list is dreary for Canadians, unlike Americans who can get their services immediately through paying out-of-pocket, the long public sector in Alberta waits up to a year for services, the wait for cataract surgery was six weeks ; these waits for some patients put the public health care system to shame, and helps push the idea of the privatized health care system a bettering option for the future of the nation. Additionally, 41 percent of adult Canadians said they experienced a difficulty in accessing hospital and physician care on weekday nights and weekends . Furthermore, it is still evident that Canadians in fact pay a higher income tax compared to Americans, due to the fact that they are paying the fund the health care system through their taxes; however, it is still significantly less to pay for a public health care system than it is privatized . Privatization is further proved as a superior choice with regards to the discharge situation many Canadians face. In Canada, it is common to see patients discharged earlier than recommended due the rising amount of patients using the free-of-charge public health care system, patients are released “quicker and sicker” because of this . Additionally, when discharged, the public health care system does not cover home care and private nurse care ; further proving the notion that there is still some forms of privatization already in the health care system in
LaPierre, T. A. (2012). Comparing the Canadian and US Systems of Health Care in an Era of Health Care Reform. Journal of Health Care Finance, 38(4), 1-18.
A Canadian Dermatologist who once worked in the United States breaks down the pros and cons of Canada’s health care system and explains why he thinks the Canadian system is superior to America’s. Canada runs a single payer health care system, which means that health care is controlled by the government rather than private insurance companies. One of the main pros of the Canadian health care system is that everyone is insured. He says that in the province of Ontario, the Ministry of Health insures all of its citizens, all important health needs such as physician visits, home nursing and physical therapy are covered. Since every resident is covered under the government plan the problem of patients being turned away due to lacking medical coverage
Tommy Douglas was a Canadian social- democratic politician, who became the premier of Saskatchewan in 1944. Tommy Douglas believed that it was his responsibility as premier to improve the lives of ordinary people. In fact, he had experienced firsthand people dying, because they did not have enough money for the treatment they needed. It was from that day he said “If I ever had the power I would, if it were humanly possible, see that the financial barrier between those who need health services and those who have health services was forever removed.” So, when he became premier he enacted the first Medicare plan in Saskatchewan, which in 1972 was adopted in all provinces in Canada. The universal health care system has many advantages and should be adopted by other countries as well. This system would decrease the world’s death rate, there are also many people out there who cannot afford health care and it would be easier with universal health care to have everyone under one system.
Though, Professor Armstrong makes very good connections between health care policy reforms and its impact on women, all of these connections are eclipsed by the values encompassed within the Canada Health Act of 1984. Health care to this day is provided on the basis of need rather than financial means, and is accessible to all that require it. Professor Armstrong’s argument is hinged upon the scope of services provided under the public health insurance system, and the subsequent affect of these reforms on women as the main beneficiaries of these services and as workers in these industries. However, these reforms were made to balance the economy, and the downsizing and cutbacks were necessary steps to be taken with respect to this agenda. Moreover, as aforementioned the access to medical services ultimately comes down to need, and the reforms to date are not conducive to an intentional subordination of female interests in the realm of health care. Therefore, I find Professor Armstrong’s critique on Canada’s public health insurance system to be relatively redundant because the universal access to care encompassed within the Canada Health Act transcends the conditional proponents of her arguments of inequality. In other words, I believe she is
Neighboring countries, the United States and Canada, have close ties to one another, share the same language and have many of the same fundamental and religious beliefs. It is an interesting debt that provides a superior healthcare system. In order to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of the two systems, this paper will review four important structural and functional elements of each system. 1. Who receives healthcare coverage?
The Canadian health care system promises universality, portability, and accessibility; unfortunately, it faces political challenges of meeting pub...
At the beginning of the 20th century healthcare was a necessity in Canada, but it was not easy to afford. When Medicare was introduced, Canadians were thrilled to know that their tax dollars were going to benefit them in the future. The introduction of Medicare made it easier for Canadians to afford healthcare. Medicare helped define Canada as an equal country, with equal rights, services and respect for every Canadian citizen. Medicare helped less wealthy Canadians afford proper healthcare. Canadian citizens who had suffered from illness because they could not afford healthcare, were able to get proper treatment. The hospitals of Canada were no longer compared by their patients’ wealth, but by their amount of service and commitment. Many doctors tried to stop the Medicare act, but the government and citizens outvoted them and the act was passed. The doctors were then forced to treat patients in order of illness and not by the amount of money they had. Medicare’s powerful impact on Canadian society was recognized globally and put into effect in other nations all around the world. Equality then became a definition which every Canadian citizen understood.
In this paper, there will be a comparative analysis to the United States (U.S.) healthcare system and Canadians healthcare system highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of both.
In Canada, access to health care is ‘universal’ to its citizens under the Canadian Health Care Act and this system is considered to the one of the best in the world (Laurel & Richard, 2002). Access to health care is assumed on the strong social value of equality and is defined as the distribution of services to all those in need and for the common good and health of all residents (Fierlbeck, 2011). Equitable access to health care does not mean that all citizens are subjected to receive the same number of services but rather that wherever the service is provided it is based on need. Therefore, not all Canadians have equal access to health services. The Aboriginal peoples in Canada in particular are a population that is overlooked and underserved
A good example of why Liberalism is the number one choice from most Canadians is public and privatized hospitals. Right now, Canada only has public hospitals that are free for everybody in need of medical assistance but require a health care plan. Public hospitals are paid by taxes, just like public education. The only downfall of publicized faculties is that they are normally very crowded, and you cannot always get help as fast. Private hospitals appeal more to people with money. People who are willing to pay the extra couple grand for faster and, some say, of better quality care. Since normally the best doctors would be working in their own pri...
Today, Canadians are concerned with many issues involving health care. It is the responsibility of the provincial party to come up with a fair, yet reasonable solution to this issue. This solution must support Canadians for the best; it involves people and how they are treated when in need for health care. The Liberal party feels that they have the best solution that will provide Canadians with the best results. It states that people will have the protection of medicare and will help with concerns like: injury prevention, nutrition, physical activity, mental health, etc. The Canadian Alliance Party’s plan is to make several policy-developments to benefit Canada’s health care. They believe it will serve the security and well-being best for all Canadians. The last party involved in this issue is the NDP Party; who indicate that they are fighting hard for a better Health Care system in our economy. The NDP Party states that the income of a family should not dictate the quality of health care.
On December 29th, 1999, Nancy MacBeth leader of the Alberta liberal party was cited in the Edmonton Journal as saying: “ There’s ‘ample evidence’ that the Alberta government’s plan to expand the role of private health-care will contravene the Canada Health Act.” This is the strongest argument against privatization. It reflects the fears of many Albertans and Canadians; the fear that a two-tier system similar to that of the United States will develop. The fear that the system which was built upon values reflected in five principles will be eroded and replaced and that they will be the ones left to suffer the consequences. Privatization of health care would undermine the principles of the Canada Health Act and as such would undermine the integrity of the health care system.
Being a Canadian citizen, it is hard for me to think of life without any health insurance. I have had public health insurance all my life growing up and have been free to go to any hospital at any time and get some form of health care. Residing in the United States off and for the last 7 years I have experienced health care from both sides. I feel that private health care has huge advantages over public health care. In the following essay I will explain in three points why I feel strongly about private health care as opposed to public. What is better is always subjective, and I will not try to argue the point of health for all, but instead for the individual who is seeking the best health care possible, and is willing to put the resources into obtaining that. I will be addressing efficiency and quality, not inclusion of everyone (free health care), I will be addressing the root of this and not just that one argument, which would detract from my focus. I will not be getting into the political debate of socialism vs. capitalism, as that is a separate argument in itself, and this country is currently running under capitalism. Again coming from living in both a socialist and then a capitalist society, I feel I can do so in an unbiased manner.
Whereas in the United States, “Obamacare, depends on your job or income.If you lose your job or lose your income, and you might lose your existing health insurance or have to settle for lesser coverage(Ralph Nader).” With Obamacare the list of doctors are strict that you are allowed to visit, which is a big issue for many American.In Canada, “you can freely choose your doctors and hospitals and keep them. There are no lists of in-network vendors and no extra hidden charges for going out of network.(Ralph Nader)” Canadians say it is unheard of for anyone to go bankrupt from healthcare cost unlike in America where healthcare drives many Americans to the plague of
Health care is an intrinsic part of the Canadian identity It symbolizes Canadians’ defining virtue as a people of impartiality. Public health care is fundamental to the twenty-first century, as, by offering all Canadians the best possible health programs and services, it promotes a healthier population, which is crucial to our success as a nation. Upholding this system is essential, as it guarantees everyone access to quality health care, significantly improving Canadians’ quality of life. Public health care protects the population’s well-being through education and prevention, thereby minimizing the potential damage if disease, injury and illness.