Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Medical ethics, quizlets
Although the Affordable Health Care Act represents a step in the right direction towards encouraging all Americans to benefit themselves of medical services, the bill fails to address the source causes of problems in the system. The American health care system is imperfect because it is a nonprofit model that places profits far ahead of patients. When profits come ahead of patients, the result is an incapability to fulfill the ethical duties of being a health care worker. A progressive transformation of the American health care system would systematically undo the wicked link between corporate interests and the interests of health care.
The relationship between doctors and drug companies has been well established and well documented. Major news media resources like The Atlantic, as well as professional peer-reviewed journals like the New England Journal of Medicine cover stories addressing the potential ethical puzzles between physicians and pharmaceutical companies. Shaywitz (2013) has described the problem as “a bunch of wicked pushers who pay off vulnerable doctors to prescribe their latest expensive, mediocre product,” while still defending the special relationship that has developed between doctors and pharmaceutical companies (p. 1). Shaywitz’s (2013) argument is based on opinion on estimate only. Most established professional journals imply that collusion between doctors and drug companies leads to a range of problems that potentially harm patients. Writing for the British Medical Journal, Moynihan (2003) locates actual empirical evidence showing that doctors’ prescribing habits changes measurably after the skillful marketing techniques used by pharmaceutical industry representatives: techniques ranging from free ...
... middle of paper ...
...
Campbell, E.G. (2007). Doctors and drug companies, Scrutinizing influential relationships. New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 357: 1796-1797.
Carollo, K. (2010). Pay dirt: hundreds of doctors earned big money from drug companies. ABC News. 25 October, 2010. Retrieved online: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/drug-companies-payments-doctors-revealed-database/story?id=11929217
“Let the Sunshine In,” (2013). The Economist. Mar 2, 2013. Retrieved online: http://www.economist.com/news/business/21572784-new-efforts-reveal-ties-between-doctors-and-drug-firms-let-sunshine
Moynihan, R. (2003). Who pays for the pizza? BMJ 2003; 326:1189.
Shaywitz, D.A. (2013). Between doctors and drug companies. The Atlantic. 7 May 2013. Retrieved online: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/05/getting-to-the-right-relationship-between-doctors-and-drug-companies/275605/
One of the most controversial topics in the United States in recent years has been the route which should be undertaken in overhauling the healthcare system for the millions of Americans who are currently uninsured. It is important to note that the goal of the Affordable Care Act is to make healthcare affordable; it provides low-cost, government-subsidized insurance options through the State Health Insurance Marketplace (Amadeo 1). Our current president, Barack Obama, made it one of his goals to bring healthcare to all Americans through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. This plan, which has been termed “Obamacare”, has come under scrutiny from many Americans, but has also received a large amount of support in turn for a variety of reasons. Some of these reasons include a decrease in insurance discrimination on the basis of health or gender and affordable healthcare coverage for the millions of uninsured. The opposition to this act has cited increased costs and debt accumulation, a reduction in employer healthcare coverage options, as well as a penalization of those already using private healthcare insurance.
Anna Wilde Mathews and Jonathan Rockoff authored Megadeal Unites Drug Rivals in a published WSJ.com article of July 22, 2011. The article addresses the merger of two pharmacy benefits companies, Express Scripts Inc. and Medco Health Solutions Inc., along with the merger’s ramifications on the health care industry. This strategic merger is expected to impact the pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) market in conjunction with influencing drug costs and channels and possibly raising anti-trust concerns.
In Melody Peterson’s “Our Daily Meds” , the history of marketing and advertising in the pharmaceutical industry is explored. The first chapter of the book, entitled “Creating disease”, focuses on how major pharmaceutical companies successfully create new ailments that members of the public believe exist. According to Peterson, the success that these drug manufacturers have experienced can be attributed to the malleability of disease, the use of influencial people to promote new drugs, the marketing behind pills, and the use of media outlets.
The facts bear out the conclusion that the way healthcare in this country is distributed is flawed. It causes us to lose money, productivity, and unjustly leaves too many people struggling for what Thomas Jefferson realized was fundamental. Among industrialized countries, America holds the unique position of not having any form of universal health care. This should lead Americans to ask why the health of its citizens is “less equal” than the health of a European.
America is known for democracy, freedom, and the American Dream. American citizens have the right to free speech, free press, the right to bear arms, and the right to religious freedom to name a few. The Declaration of Independence states that American citizens have the rights including “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” America promises equality and freedom and the protection of their rights as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. But with all the rights and freedoms that American citizens enjoy, there is one particular area where the United States seems to be lacking. That area is health care. The United States is the only industrialized nation that doesn’t have some form of legal recognition of a right to health care (Yamin 1157). Health care reform in the United States has become a major controversy for politicians, health care professionals, businesses, and citizens. Those in opposition to reform claim that health care is not a human right, therefore the government should not be involved. Supporters of reform believe that health care is most definitely a human right and should be available to everyone in the United States instead of only those who can afford it, and that it is the government’s responsibility to uphold that right.
3Walker, Hugh: Market Power and Price levels in the Ethical Drug Industry; Indiana University Press, 1971, P 25.
In recent years, the number of Americans who are uninsured has reached over 45 million citizens, with millions more who only have the very basic of insurance, effectively under insured. With the growing budget cuts to medicaid and the decreasing amount of employers cutting back on their health insurance options, more and more americans are put into positions with poor health care or no access to it at all. At the heart of the issue stems two roots, one concerning the morality of universal health care and the other concerning the economic effects. Many believe that health care reform at a national level is impossible or impractical, and so for too long now our citizens have stood by as our flawed health-care system has transformed into an unfixable mess. The good that universal healthcare would bring to our nation far outweighs the bad, however, so, sooner rather than later, it is important for us to strive towards a society where all people have access to healthcare.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed by President Barack Obama is a significant change of the American healthcare system since insurance plans programs like Medicare and Medicaid (“Introduction to”). As a result, “It is also one of the most hotly contested, publicly maligned, and politically divisive pieces of legislation the country has ever seen” (“Introduction to”). The Affordable Care Act should be changed because it grants the government too much control over the citizen’s healthcare or the lack of individual freedom to choose affordable health insurance.
If the United States had unlimited funds, the appropriate response to such a high number of mentally ill Americans should naturally be to provide universal coverage that doesn’t discriminate between healthcare and mental healthcare. The United States doesn’t have unlimited funds to provide universal healthcare at this point, but the country does have the ability to stop coverage discrimination. A quarter of the 15.7 million Americans who received mental health care listed themselves as the main payer for the services, according to one survey that looked at those services from 2005 to 2009. 3 Separate research from the same agency found 45 percent of those not receiving mental health care listing cost as a barrier.3 President Obama and the advisors who helped construct The Affordable Care Act recognized the problem that confronts the mentally ill. Mental healthcare had to be more affordable and different measures had to be taken to help patients recover. Although The Affordable Care Act doesn’t provide mentally ill patients will universal coverage, the act has made substantial changes to the options available to them.
Print. The. Freudenheim, Milt “Influencing Doctor’s Orders” New York Times. " Off the Charts: Pay, Profits and Spending by Drug Companies." Families USA, July 2001.
Health insurance, too many American citizens, is not an option. However, some citizens find it unnecessary. Working in the health care field, I witness the effects of uninsured patients on medical offices. Too often, I see a “self-pay” patient receive care from their doctor and then fail to pay for it. Altogether, their refusal to pay leaves the office at a loss of money and calls for patients to pay extra in covering for the cost of the care the uninsured patient received. One office visit does not seem like too big of an expense, but multiple patients failing to pay for the care they receive adds up. Imagine the hospital bills that patients fail to pay; health services in a hospital are double, sometimes triple, in price at a hospital. It is unfair that paying patients are responsible for covering these unpaid services. Luckily, the Affordable Care Act was passed on March 23, 2010, otherwise known as Obamacare. Obamacare is necessary in America because it calls for all citizens to be health insured, no worrying about pre-existing conditions, and free benefits for men and women’s health.
Over the span of half a century, the medical profession has witnessed a catastrophic shift in the patient-physician relationship. As the manufacturing of new pharmaceuticals and the number of patients under a physician’s care continue to rise, doctor’s are finding it difficult to employ the time-honored principles listed within the Hippocratic Oath. This oath, written in 430 BC by the Greek Physician, Hippocrates, was the first document to state the responsibilities of a physician to his patient (vadscorner, pg 2). Hippocrates believed that it was the physician’s duty, as a healer, to treat the patient infected with the disease to the best of his ability, and not to treat the disease (Hippocrates, pg 1 ). He believed that the patient was, above all, the most important aspect involved in the healing process. With the rise in the number of patients under a physician’s care and the stringent rules by which each doctor must abide, many doctor’s are finding that they are unable to devote ample time to become acquainted with their patients (spiralnotebook, pg 1). Furthermore, as newly acquired information regarding illnesses becomes available on the internet, patients are seeking the advice of multiple physicians (Changing, pg 3). These differences between patients and their physicians, as well as numerous others, have caused rifts in the patient-doctor relationship.
“According to the General Accounting Office, more than half of the prescription drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 1976 and 1985 caused serious side effects that later caused the drugs to be either relabeled or removed from the market. Drugs app...
The Affordable Care Act has been at the center of political debate within the United States for the since current President Barack Obama signed it into law in 2010. The act represents the most significant regulatory healthcare overhaul of the United States healthcare system since the passage of both Medicaid and Medicare collectively Initially, the ACA was enacted with the goals of increasing the availability of affordable health insurance, lowering the uninsured rate by expanding public and private insurance and reducing cost of healthcare for individuals and the government (Robert, 2012). Proponents of the act’s passage have articulated that the ACA provides service for free, such as preventative health coverage for those registered, it requires that insurance companies can no longer deny person’s or children with pre-existing conditions and will close the Medicare “Donut Hole” for prescription drugs. While the Act has the potential to provide better quality of healthcare for the American populace, opponents argue that the ACA is flawed and could create a quagmire of cost and confusion with its implementation. Arguments against it hold the belief that it would force employers with religious affiliation to provide services to employees through their health plans that directly contradict their values. As a result of cost, companies may void out of their employer health insurance and pay a penalty as opposed to pay for employee insurance. Lastly, the act is said to focus more on registration the actually addressing cost of healthcare. While these issues are pertinent, the overall accessibility to healthcare created by the ACA and outweighs the negating arguments.
10. Collis, David, and Troy Smith. "Strategy in the Twenty-First Century Pharmaceutical Industry:Merck&Co. and Pfizer Inc." Harvard Business School, 2007: 8-12.