Pros And Cons Of Privatization Of Public Health

           In a country where healthcare is a decision, many debate if our country should keep our health care system privatized. Health care is an essential need in society because individual health can change at any time without warning at any time. While there are both pros and cons of this system, the pros outway the cons. I believe that our nation should ensure basic health care to all legal citizens, no matter the class. Many Americans fall into circumstances where they are not able to pay the expensive bills that privatized insurance companies billhave so they do not have chose to not have insurance at all. Universal health care gives those people the means of financial support when they medically need

Katherine C., an RN in Ontario, has been asked to sit on a panel of health care professionals to speak on behalf of nurses about their position on the Canada Health Act and the privatization of health care.

"Universal healthcare refers to a healthcare system that provides benefits to all persons in a particular country." (Definition of "Universal Healthcare Coverage", Investopedia.com). This form of healthcare is used among the richest countries, Ex. Canada and France. Other rich countries that use the Universal Healthcare system spend far less than the United States does. Although the U.S spends more on healthcare, “The U.S ranks 28th below almost all other rich countries, when it comes to the quality of its healthcare assessed by UN parameters (pdf, p.13)"(Annalisa Merreli, A history of why the US is the only rich country without universal healthcare, qz.com). These statistics call for a change. The United States should adopt universal healthcare because it would benefit business, provide equal access to healthcare, and is a human right.

According to Samuel Flam and William Keane authors of Public Schools: Private Enterprise, the definition of privatize is “...the process of turning over to private companies, programs, services and sometimes properties previously operated and/or owned by a government agency” (Flam & Keane, 1997, p.15). Privatizing of a school service is selling a service of the school district to a private company that runs, maintains and keeps up the service. The school district no longer oversees this service and virtually has no control over what they do but outsourcing this service would cut back on the economic spending of the school. A school service is something that students receive that is provided for them in school to enhance their well-being. In the school system, some examples of services that could be outsourced by a private company are school lunches, buses and janitor staff. According to Joe Argon author of Changing of the Guard, “for schools, transportation, food service, HVAC maintenance, computer servicing and printing continue to be the areas privatized most often” (Argon, 1997). The main issue behind this is finding out if privatizing school services does the school district more harm or good and what happens to the services and students after they have been privatized.

By understanding the two opposing systems regarding health care, I believe that the Canadian health-care system should in fact be privatized. Despite the fact that the public health-care system is a great way of providing medical care to everyone, I believe that I am not receiving the best health-care that I could be receiving in other countries. Another reason why I favor privatized health care over publicized is because of what progressive taxation imposes among individuals who have a higher salary, they are taxed at a higher rate, due to the fact that they possess a larger amount taxable than those who do not make enough. I believe that hard working, successful individuals should be able to take advantage of their accomplishments, therefore

The idea is to create a government-run health care plan that would be an alternative to the private insurance plans offered under the Affordable Care Act, or provide a fallback in markets where insurers have been pulling out. A public option could also be a way to stabilize the exchanges because a government-run plan could be used to enroll the people with the most expensive medical conditions. The private insurers would be more enthusiastic about selling policies because they might have to worry less about losses. Public option is simply a public health insurance agency, typically a government-run agency that can compete with the private insurers. This is sort of a half-way point between single payer and the pre- ACA private market. Almost

Universal healthcare has been a big issue and a major problem for Americans, especially for people without it. Universal health care (Montgomery, Kelly. “Frequently asked questions.” formosapost.com. Health Insurance, 15 Feb. 2017. Web. 14 Nov. 2017.

Socialized medical systems are designed to disregard the insurance industry and disregard income while providing health care for all. Healthcare in the United States is constantly changing and advancing, which requires the cost of health insurance to rise. The idea of socialized medicine is prominent, until the aspects of socialized medicine are brought to attention. Every aspect of a socialized health care industry is controlled and powered by the government; most doctors, nurses, medics and administrators are government employees, and the government decides when, where, and how services are provided. Even though socialized healthcare systems would save money, it is a prominent idea but not worth the problems because total government control over the way healthcare is distributed would result in complications of the citizens.

Public health is positioned as one in light of the fact that public health is central to 21st century medicinal services and shares the same general objectives as whatever is left of the health care framework - lessening sudden death and minimizing the impacts of ailment, incapacity, and damage furthermore gives financial and social advantages to the area, due to some degree to expanded profit.

The NHS works across organisational boundaries and in partnership with other organisations in the interest of patients, local communities and the wider

A health system also reffered as health care system. Health care system is an organization of people, institutions, and resources that deliver health care services to meet the needs of target populations.

The barriers to receiving effective public health treatment are nothing short of intimidating. Many people in the United States could die if they do not receive adequate public health that take care of their diseases. The government need to create available programs to deal with the increase of diseases and with the aging U.S. population. Invasive and debatable actions sometimes are needed it to find the causes of some diseases.

Socialized medicine, when the healthcare is provided by the government, has many benefits including: reducing Americans’ financial struggles, improving the American economy, and allowing Americans to live healthier lives The American people must support the creation of socialized medicine in the United States. The United States currently lacks any true form of socialized medicine. Obamacare and Medicare for All, Bernie Sander’s proposal for socialized medicine, are the closet systems the United States has to socialized medicine. Obamacare was estimated to save tens of thousands of lives by expanding the number of people with access to healthcare and prohibiting insurance companies from discriminating against people with existing conditions (Alter).

What proponents of private health care delivery fail to mention is the multitude of evidence demonstrating that private delivery models often fair worse than public delivery models in terms of health outcomes and of quality of care. For example, a 2002 systematic review of 26,000 for-profit and not-for-profit hospitals found that private for-profit delivery was associated with a 2% higher risk of death for patients (Devereaux et al., 2002). Similarly, a review of 149 studies spanning 20 years of data concluded that private for-profit models do not perform better on measures related to access, quality and cost-effectiveness (Vaillancourt-Rosenau & Linder, 2003). Moreover, evidence suggests that having more private, for-profit clinics may be associated with reduced access to care, as these clinics drain the limited supply of physicians and other health professionals from

Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Youness Elhamidi, Department of Public Administration, American Public University System, 111 W. Congress Street, Charles Town, WV 25414. E-mail: yelhamidi@apus.edu.