The Healthcare System Between France And U.s Essay

In 2010, the United States created The Affordable Care Act (ACA). The objective was to share the responsibility of costs between the government, individuals, and employers to provide affordable access to quality health insurance. “However, health coverage remains fragmented, with numerous private and public sources, as well as wide gaps in insured rates across the U.S. population.” (“United States: International Health Care System Profiles,” n.d.). Each individual state within the US, generally has control over private insurance.

A right to adequate healthcare is necessary for a society to flourish. According to Levinas ' explanation, businesses assume that self-interest drives human behavior and if people want health care that badly then they will pay what it costs (Degnim and Wood 2007 page 6).Yet, if someone cannot afford healthcare and are denied it, then they are being denied a human right. According to United Nations healthcare is considered a human right (United Nations Article 25 2014). Well, the denial of healthcare or inadequate healthcare for Americans is a complex problem today. Healthcare has not been accessible to all American citizens, at least not until recent changes were made to the healthcare system. On the other hand, Belgium has had universal coverage for its citizens long before America. A large part of Belgium 's healthcare is non private, unlike the USA. I will discuss the healthcare system of the USA and Belgium in terms of the four characteristics of a healthcare system: cost effectiveness, portability and choice, quality, and universal care. I will also discuss the American healthcare reform as an expansion of the former healthcare system.

Many would agree that a worthy, controlled health system, above all, should essentially contribute to good health. The responsibility of a health care system is that the organization of people, institutions, and resources deliver the health care services required and meet the health needs of focus populations. Another duty that the health care systems stimulate is the reduction of inequality to race, gender, social status and religion. Each health care system is different when looking at specific countries across the world, however some countries are more similar than others, such as France and Canada’s health care system. These two countries have numerous similarities when examining their health care systems, conversely that does not denote that both France and Canada are just as equivalent as the other. When observing countless aspects, such as longevity and infant mortality, as well as a lot of the inputs such as doctors or beds per capita, and of course the total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP over the year, it is seen that France has a better and more enhanced health care system than Canada.

The infrastructure of the United States healthcare system has long been a point of contention for many, especially with the recent passage of the Affordable Care Act by President Obama, which serves to reform the past healthcare system into a more socialized Universal Healthcare system. Proponents of Universal Healthcare in the United States like to point to the success of countries such as Brazil, Thailand, and Canada to name a few, who have in fact adopted a form of Universal Healthcare, but

The purpose of this paper is to compare the Canadian and the United States health care system. the first part of the paper will focus on describing each country health care system. The second part will focus on analyzing, evaluating and comparing these two countries system efficiency and benefits. The last part, is an overview of the recent policies changes and its effect (positive and negative) on each country citizens and proposed future reforms for better coverage in these countries.

The Affordable Healthcare Act is one of the most predominate issues in American Healthcare. While it was not a primary factor in the 2016 presidential election, it was a very important issue. It is important because it serves over sixteen million Americans. I will discuss through research that the two prevailing rules of thought are to either repeal the Affordable Care Act or to improve the Affordable Care Act. I will show the advantages of both and hopefully show which is better for America, not which is better for me.

This paper will endeavor to examine The Affordable Care Act (ACA), more commonly known as Obamacare. Initially the paper will explore the first try at a single payer system in the United States by President Bill Clinton and swiftly move to the contemporary system of the Affordable Care Act, with some interesting data that supports the policy, explore how hospitals and families are impacted as well. People deceive, data does not lie.

On March 23, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law. Accompanied by a strong sense of disapproval from the public, which resulted in a rush to get the bill passed and deadlines tightened to make sure things were on the agenda on time. A debate ensued among the bill’s supporters regarding the importance of public opinion surrounding the ACA. The vast majority of supporters concluded it is only a minor part of the reform and not a critical component. The ACA has only been in effect for the past few years, and this short time gap makes assessing definitive effects of the ACA difficult. Success in in terms of the ACA is hard to define. This is due to the intentions set forth by the government being genially vague and ambiguous. Even so, with the ACA’s rapid movement through the design process many inconsistences in the reporting and managing of the proposed healthcare policy were noted. This led to an underestimation of the costs and overestimation of the perceived benefits. The result of the cost-benefit analysis and reviews of alternative methods were forgone in order to pass quick regulations. Furthermore, regulators failed to consider the moral hazards of the new rules, which are a result of people changing their habits because they don 't have to worry about the outcomes. For instance, people may smoke or drink more knowing that insurance will pay for any medical treatment. Furthermore, people can use the services for relatively minor issues

My paper is comparing the healthcare system in France to the healthcare system we have in the United States. We need to look at France’s healthcare and other countries with universal healthcare and ask ourselves “Is it sustainable?” Is it feasible?” “Will it provide for those who don’t have insurance and help those that do?” The results show universal healthcare is usable, but there have to be guidelines, who it covers, what it covers, and what improvements need to be made to make it work. When other countries have been using universal healthcare for 60 + years, it shows there is hope for it in this country too. Healthcare is a growing problem, but it might become more of one if taxes are raised to cover the cost. France’s NHS

The U.S. is an industrialized nation that continues to be behind on providing health care coverage to all citizens. However, the German health care system came up with a plan that ensured all citizens are provided with some form of health care coverage; nevertheless, the U.S. continues to dispute health care reform and how to provide coverage to all citizens. “Health spending per capita in the United States is much higher than in other countries – at least $2,535 dollars, or 51%, higher than Norway, the next largest per capita spender. Furthermore, the United States spends nearly double the average $3,923 for the 15 countries ("Health Care Cost," 2011, table 1)”.

The evaluation criteria to determine the effectiveness of this policy must include a variety of facets. First, there is the obvious quantitative evaluation method in determining how many Americans are uninsured or under-insured after the plan is fully implemented. It is estimated that the policy will provide coverage to more than 94% of Americans (“The Patient Protection”, n.d.). Although serving these Americans is a primary goal of the Act, whether or not all of the people will be served is yet to be seen and will need to be monitored. In addition, the quality and efficacy of healthcare is another primary concern of this policy.

This paper presents a comparison of the health care systems in the United States and the Netherlands. The health care systems in the United States and the Netherlands are both a work in progress. This paper compares the many common strengths and weaknesses between these two countries health care systems using recent data and current trends. The government of the Netherlands has been working towards providing universal health coverage for their citizens since World War II. The government of the United States is divided on the necessity of providing universal health coverage for its citizens; however, it appears to be moving in this direction. The United States approximately 70 years behind the Netherlands on the health care front. Comparing the similarities and differences in the health care systems of the United States and the Netherlands gives a lot of insight into policy changes and reform that could benefit the United States. The continually improving health care system in the Netherlands may be the best model for the United States as it moves towards a Universal Health Care system.

In this paper, the USA healthcare system is being compared to the Canadian healthcare system. The U.S. health system has been described as the most competitive, heterogeneous, and inefficient, fragmented, and advanced system of care in the

     Through out the world today health care is a major issue in just about every country. Britain and France are no exception to this rule. Since a very long time ago there have been long standing battles between the people and governments as to how far the governments must go to provide adequate health care for its people. For the upper and middle classes health care usually comes with no problem but for the lower classes they are forced to depend on government assistance.

In France, the Health Care system is solely run and funded (hospitalization and medication) by the Social Security department (Geschwind, 1999). In the case of serious diseases, it is completely covered by insurance for a limited time (Geschwind, 1999). Also, full coverage can be granted for some procedures if citizens have insurance through a private firm. One major con of the health care system is that they have limited hospice beds and intensive care in relation to the amplified aging population who are not able to be cared for at their homes (Geschwind,