Michael Moore's Health Care Policy Analysis

1332 Words6 Pages
In Michael Moore’s documentary, the issues of America’s healthcare system are examined. According to Michael Moore, America’s healthcare system is inefficient compared to other advanced nations. Even though Moore’s documentary is quite informative and can in many ways set the stage for a policy analysis, it does lack in certain areas that overstates the negatives of the healthcare system while under-emphasizing the positive qualities of America’s healthcare system. While for the most part, Moore’s documentary hits all major areas that are needed to write a policy analysis, he does so in a way that holds much bias. In fact, Moore attempts to show the audience that universal healthcare is sound, but due to him leaving out equal representation…show more content…
He compares the healthcare programs of the U.S. with Canada, Cuba, and France and Moore makes it very clear that the United States is the only modern nation without some version of universal access to healthcare services. Where all other industrialized countries have addressed the issue and the financial challenges associated with it, the United States healthcare system has yet to iron out such problems because of the corrupt health care system itself. To support his claim, he paints the picture of greedy insurance companies denying experimental care to the patients and HMO’s not accepting new patients due to pre-existing conditions (these represent the stakeholders). Incidentally, Moore does rely on anecdotal evidence to prove that emergency waiting rooms in other countries are particularly efficient, and both doctors and patients alike are satisfied with socialized medicine. However, Michael Moore skips over other issues or does not even address issues at all. From what is documented in the film, it is hard to prove such theories that other country’s health care systems are more advanced than America. It is impossible to make sound conclusions about the true running of their systems. In a sense, Moore does not pleasure the actual health care system in those countries but…show more content…
Even though it does miss some of the aspects that are required to obtain a detailed policy analysis, what he does document is along the lines of what is needed. For instance, Moore gives the audience a brief background of his topic. He does a thorough job detailing stories from people, insurance company employees, and doctors. Moore even plays back tapes of when Nixon was in office. In that tape we learn that Nixon strongly approved of a new 1970’s health care concept called HMO, where the more patients are denied health care services, the more money the hospitals and health insurance companies profit. Moore’s introduction sets the stage and therefore could be the background/landscape of a policy analysis. However, what is missing in his background is more factual information about the whole history of America’s healthcare system including the history of health insurance itself. Also, Moore’s tone in discussing his topic is rather sarcastic and unprofessional, which also undermines the quality of his work. From there, Moore introduces his stakeholders. He uses real life stories of (emotionally charged) people who have private insurance but still do not receive adequate care. He touches on HMO’s, pre-existing conditions, denied care, drug companies and their need for profit to finance research and development. Moore’s representation for stakeholders also include people like Hillary Clinton,
Open Document