Introduction
For many years, there has been a heated argument about whether healthcare should be provided free of charge in the US. Access to healthcare is a vital human right that should be guaranteed to everyone (Zieff et al. 2). While some contend that access to healthcare is a fundamental human right and should be available to everyone, others think it would be prohibitively expensive and result in subpar service.
Exorbitant Healthcare Costs
The current healthcare system in the United States must be improved, leaving millions without access to primary medical care. According to recent statistics, over 27 million Americans lack health insurance (Zieff et al. 3). Even those with insurance face high deductibles and copays, making healthcare unaffordable. Thus, free healthcare would reduce the burden on emergency rooms, which currently serve as primary care facilities for uninsured patients who cannot afford regular doctor visits.
Compared to other nations worldwide, the price of prescription pharmaceuticals is likewise outrageous in the US. Due to high costs, many Americans are forced to forgo their prescriptions or skip doses. For many Americans, poor health outcomes result from a lack of affordable healthcare access (Zieff et al. 4). For instance, due to insufficient prenatal care among low-income couples without insurance, the infant mortality rate in the US is greater than that of other industrialized nations like Canada and Japan.
Justifications for Universal Healthcare in the USA
Access to healthcare is a basic human right, meaning implementing universal healthcare would promote social justice. It will ensure that everyone can get primary medical care regardless of income or employment status. Many Americans are uninsured or underinsured due to unemployment or pre-existing conditions that make them ineligible for private insurance (Zieff et al. 5). This issue creates significant disparities in access to care across socioeconomic groups.
Another primary justification for universal healthcare is that all Americans will experience better health outcomes. Studies have repeatedly demonstrated that nations with universal healthcare systems have healthier populations than those without (Zieff et al. 6). For instance, the US ranks lowest among 11 industrialized countries in terms of the performance of its total health system, according to a report by the Commonwealth Fund (Zieff et al. 7). On metrics like life expectancy and infant mortality rates, nations with universal healthcare systems, like Canada and France, typically rank higher.
The final justification for universal healthcare is that it can reduce the financial strain on people and families. Despite having the highest healthcare spending per person globally, the US has millions of uninsured people who cannot afford even the most basic medical treatment. Hence, to realize a universal healthcare system in the USA in any of the ways, significant human and financial resources will be needed (Bloom et al. 2). The government might bargain for cheaper costs for medical services and prescription pharmaceuticals on behalf of all Americans by instituting a single-payer system or another type of universal coverage.
Arguments Against Free Healthcare in the USA
Providing free healthcare to all citizens would be incredibly expensive. Taxes would have to be raised significantly to cover the cost of universal healthcare, which could hurt businesses and individuals alike (Zieff et al. 5). While there may be initial costs associated with implementing such a system, in the long run, it could save money by reducing administrative costs associated with private insurance companies. Nevertheless, the cost of providing healthcare to all citizens would be enormous, but it is unclear how the government would pay for it.
Secondly, some argue that free healthcare would lead to longer waits for medical procedures and appointments. In countries with universal healthcare systems, patients often wait for months to receive specific treatments or surgeries (Zieff et al. 5). This strategy can result in unnecessary suffering and even death for those who need urgent care. Henceforth, free healthcare could lead to longer wait times, lower quality care, and decreased personal responsibility.
Thirdly, opponents of free healthcare argue that it could decrease the quality of care provided. When the government pays doctors less for their services, they may be less motivated to provide high-quality care. Additionally, hospitals may cut expenses on equipment and staffing if they are not receiving sufficient government funding. Ultimately, every decision about whether to offer free healthcare must weigh the advantages and disadvantages of such a program.
Suggestions for Making Healthcare in the USA Universal
Raising taxes on high-income individuals might be one approach to funding universal healthcare in the USA. A larger share of those with annual incomes above a specific threshold may be compelled to contribute to the cost of healthcare for all Americans (Zieff et al.). However, some may claim that such an action would be unjust, as it would punish achievement and effort.
Implementing a single-payer system is one option for universal healthcare in the USA. This strategy would imply that a government-funded insurance scheme would cover all medical costs for all US citizens. Due to the high administrative expenses affecting patients and doctors, this approach would likely be eliminated with the involvement of private insurance providers. Hence, a healthier population is more productive, and reducing healthcare costs will free up resources for other essential government programs.
Advocates claim that by cutting administrative costs, finances may be redirected to help all Americans access better, more affordable healthcare. This approach involves extending Medicaid eligibility or establishing a single-payer national system. It may be possible to achieve this aim by simplifying administrative procedures across various healthcare organizations (Zieff et al. 4). A reasonable step would be to reduce administrative expenses while enhancing patient outcomes by standardizing these procedures nationwide.
Conclusion
Implementing free healthcare in the United States would not only benefit individuals but also contribute positively to society as a whole. Egalitarian opportunities for all citizens, regardless of income level, would be provided by free healthcare. Americans should receive better care from their healthcare system than they already do. The government must act and put measures in place to ensure that every American has access to high-quality, affordable healthcare.
Works Cited
Bloom, David E., et al. “The Promise and Peril of Universal Health Care.” Science, vol. 361, no. 6404, 2018, p.1-10.
Zieff, Gabriel, et al. “Universal Healthcare in the United States of America: A Healthy Debate.” Medicina, vol. 56, no. 11, University of São Paulo, Oct. 2020, p.1-7.