Human rights are universal and inalienable, and should be applicable to everyone without any discrimination. The right to health, covered by Article 12, refers to the need of a sufficient quantity of functioning public health and health facilities so that all people have access to their needed health services without suffering financial hardship [1]. It states that the maintenance of health should be applicable to everyone, regardless of their age, sex, and socio-economic status. Health is one of life’s great blessings that should not only be acknowledged, but also firmly practiced and supported in society to “achieve the full realization of this right” [2]. There should be authorities stepping forward to take responsibility for the welfare of the citizens in the country. The government should support the right to health through the allocation of adequate resources so all have the chance for a better life. One cannot say that the U.S.’ current healthcare system is efficient. Not only is the gap between social classes widening but many people are also in a policy trap, stuck in immense unproductivity held under the restraints of the system’s framework, coverage and access.The idea of people losing their health insurance due to unemployment is unacceptable for the global economy.
Health care in the U.S. is notoriously expensive, which has led to a great controversy over the past decades. In the majority of the nation’s medical services, the cost is significantly more expensive than when compared to any other country in the world. Additionally, it has some serious long-term social issues due to millions of uninsured citizens. America has hundreds of private insurance companies negotiating with a source of health care while others have already set prices for specific procedures. In order to solve this issue, The Affordable Care Act (ACA), better known as “ObamaCare,”which is a law mandated by President Obama in 2010, was established to ensure that Americans have access to more affordable quality health care. To make sure people could find the right insurance, the ACA created a marketplace where patients could see different health plans and prices. From there, customers could choose the one that fit their needs and budgets. One of the examples is the elimination of gender rating for health insurance premiums, a campaign that was designed by the ACA to prohibit discrimation against women who were charged more for coverage because they require gender-specific health care services such as regular gynecological visits and maternity care. In addition, there is eHealth, a cost effective and secure digital health insurance platform that meets the needs of citizens, patients, healthcare professionals, providers, and policy makers. ACA implemented new benefits, rights, and protections into the U.S. health insurance system through new provisions that provided equality to some extent. Although such implementations have mitigated the discrimination with health care costs, there are still countless problems that need to be further dealt with in order to produce a more sustainable, long term alternative to the current system. The price and administrative efficiency have been factors that have exacerbated the market that may result in legislative failure.
The U.S. healthcare system is unique among advanced industrialized countries. Rather than operating on a national health service, one has to pay the insurance which will then be provided by private sectors (private organizations). The rest of the citizens receive coverage through the government through Medicare and Medicaid. Back in 2019, 18.1% of Americans were covered by Medicare, a federal program that provides health coverage if one is 65 years and older or has a severe disability regardless of income [3]. Additionally, 17.2% of people are covered by Medicaid, a state and federal program that provides health coverage if one has very low income [4].
Those who are involved with insurance are gaining benefits from this system as well. First, they will receive cheaper health care. A large portion of why American health care is so expensive is because of its cost for private, for-profit insurance companies that dominate the insurance world. A universal coverage system, through lower administrative costs, will result in lower costs. Second, there will be greater quality care. The current U.S. system provides relatively poor quality health care, even for those who have access. By shifting to a universal coverage system, doctors would likely improve the technology by getting rid of perverse incentives. A healthier world would create a more productive economy, which ultimately provides more corporate profits and benefits.
The main conclusion we can make from this study is the fact that the U.S. does have problems, particularly from the failure to currently cover over 27 million people [5]. The system performs poorly because authorities spend too much rather than too little on its functions. Specifically, this system is proven to be inefficient as shown by its record of private spending, which is much higher than other comparable countries. According to the health system tracker, it was noted that the U.S., back in 2016, spent 8.8% of its GDP on insurance, compared to 2.7% on average for other nations [6]. Although the percentage continues to grow, people still aren’t receiving the help they need. While other countries have one universal coverage system everybody adheres to, the U.S. has numerous variations, including Medicaid, Medicare, the old BlueCross, the new BlueCross, and so on. However, there are certain aspects of the American system that have worked. For those people in the country who can afford it, most of the American insurance arrangements are the best in the world thanks to their incomparable technological advancements. Additionally, major taxpayers do not have to bear the expense associated with contributing insurance to every single citizen who can’t afford them. Despite the advantages this system brings, the main issue lies in the country’s overall health. People spend much more in the U.S. for health care, but Americans are not healthier than other nations that spend much less on their healthcare systems. In other words, Americans are currently paying more for lower quality health care, which proves that its efficiency is faulty. Soaring costs, low quality, disorientation, and an ever-growing gap between rich and poor are only some of the problems this system brings to the country’s economy.
Among all of the approaches to creating a healthcare system, private or public, one cannot determine which is the right one. One way for improvement, though, is that the U.S. should pick one and adhere to it. Without a clearly articulated consensus of basic foundations and regulations set out for the well-being of citizens, it is critical to have a system that serves as a firm groundwork for all healthcare-related matters. Because health is a life-and-death issue, it is important that there are lawmakers and politicians who can be fully responsible for protecting the lives of millions of citizens. If the system is going to be public, there should be a strong law enforced by Washington that will move the current healthcare system towards a more public nature.
As for benchmarking a system, the U.S. government can adopt the policies of other nations that have efficient healthcare implementations. For instance, the U.S. can take a look at Sweden and incorporate their model of health insurance. The Swedish model has been studied numerous times when it comes to the topic of a universal healthcare system. Due to their very efficient system, which reduces the burden of individual insurance receivers, it is one of the many countries that yields many benefits for the citizens.
The country’s government takes an essential role in managing the process, rather than independent insurance companies. According to the Commonwealth Fund, a private nonprofit foundation that aims to promote a more accessible, improved, and productive health care system, states that “at the regional level, 12 county councils and nine regional bodies are responsible for financing and delivering health services to citizens. At the local level, 290 municipalities are responsible for the care of the elderly and the disabled. The local and regional authorities are represented by the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions” [7]. Other than that, 290 municipalities are present to assist the elderly and disabled. Furthermore, there are certain people in the government who are responsible for specific roles in the system. County councils are unique to Sweden, since they are the officials who set various fees so that once patients have to undergo a distinct treatment, private companies cannot refuse. Due to these set prices, insurance companies cannot do anything but simply accept the labeled price for various medical operations. The U.S., similarly to Sweden, should have a list of prices for every medical procedure created by the central government rather than various single private companies negotiating with the main hospitals. Additionally, specialized individuals should be responsible for specific sectors of this complicated policy. The U.S. government should try to bring all the independent hospitals together in one system rather than leaving them in competition with one another. In order to implement this alternative method, the United States will need to step back and try their best to deliver what the American citizens actually need and put a price ceiling at a minimum so that they can walk into a healthcare facility knowing that they will be safely treated and not charged.
[1] Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, “Health Is a Fundamental Human Right,” World Health Organization (World Health Organization, December 10, 2017), https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/health-is-a-fundamental-human-right.
[2] “International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,” OHCHR, accessed December 18, 2020, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx.
[3] Matej Mikulic, “Medicare - Statistics & Facts,” Statista (Matej Mikulic, May 15, 2020), https://www.statista.com/topics/1167/medicare/.
[4] Matej Mikulic, “Medicaid - Statistics & Facts,” Statista (Matej Mikulic, May 4, 2020), https://www.statista.com/topics/1091/medicaid/.
[5] Stasha, “Uninsured Americans Stats and Facts 2021: Policy Advice,” How Many Americans Are Uninsured (2021), January 28, 2021, https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/how-many-uninsured-americans/.
[6] Rabah Kamal, Giorlando Ramirez, and Cynthia Cox, “How Does Health Spending in the U.S. Compare to Other Countries?,” Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker, December 23, 2020, https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-spending-u-s-compare-countries/#item-u-s-increased-public-private-sector-spending-faster-rate-similar-countries.
[7] Roosa Tikkanen et al., “Sweden,” Commonwealth Fund, June 5, 2020, https://www.commonwealthfund.org/international-health-policy-center/countries/sweden.