Compare and contrast the healthcare systems discussed in Frontline's Sick Around the World documentary. Explain which system has done the best job of balancing private interests and public good and why.
After watch the documentary Sick Around the World I felt cheated buy the American government, how is it that other country that are not nearly as wealthy as the US can find a way to provide ALL their population with healthcare. I thought the healthcare system in Taiwan was brilliant; although, it was not prefect it has all the components to be the best. The way the system runs by a card that holds all information and allow you to bill from that very card, that alone will save so much money you can eliminate 75% of your administrant cost. Also I like the policies about if you go to your physician to many times in a period the government will come out and visit with you , I like this because this can stop the people who just want to go to the doctor because they need someone to talk to that day. The major component that turned me on about the way the government in Taiwan believe that all should be covered and if you loss your job your still covered. Love it, just like the correspondent said “when you become unemployed that is the time you need healthcare the most”. I just can’t understand what the government in the US is thinking, if I had the chance to tell congress what I think about our healthcare system I would say “The US has one of the worst healthcare systems and they have no value for the human life’s as a whole, stop forcing on my education and forces on my health.”
After watching "sick around the world" I would have to say that the Taiwanese Health care system is probably the most effective one so far. At least from what the documentary showed. I liked parts of all the systems, not including the US, but I also diagreed with parts of them such as Germany and Japan. The fact that their doctors dont make enough money to have such a great living as the doctors here do and thats because everything here is so outrageously over priced and that bothers me. I guess I would prefer that everyone is getting the needed health care and check ups rather than doctors having a fancy living. I just feel they should receive a decent pay for what they do. The fact that you are still fully covered even if you do lose your job is something that has me in awe. Who offers that here? No one that i know of. If you lose your job, you lose your benefits unless you have put 20 plus years or more into that comapny and even then, who knows what they could come up with to have a reason why you dont qualify for the continued benefits even only for a few months. Having a health card with all your information to me is way more effective then medical records being faxed from dr to dr. Things get lost, people who dont need to read it do, and its just something I would be happy to have on me instead of everyone else. Not sure if they said they also keep copies but from what I understood, that card is yours to take and keep. I think the US needs to figure out a system that will benefit everyone and anyone in the way they NEED not want. Stop over pricing, stop limiting, there is no reason why everyone should be helped with some sort of healthcare that works with their financial situation. Its sad that some people have to go bankrupt in order to maintain their health and get treatment.
Of all the healthcare systems discussed in the documentary “Sick Around the World”, I found that the Taiwanese are most effective. Considering that in the late 80's they had the worst healthcare system according to them, "Even worse than the United States." In addition, more than half of the Taiwanese had no health care. To find a solution Taiwan consulted experts and examined 10-15 countries before coming to a conclusion. They pick only the effective aspects and plans then avoided repeating the mistakes other countries made within their healthcare plan. They compared their healthcare selection tactic to a "Car" by selecting different international parts to make the perfect domestic car. Taiwan's plan was put together and executed well. It was smart of them to study other countries and avoided repeating mistakes. Initially they thought that examining the US, the richest country in the world, would be the wisest thing to do until they saw all the problems and decided it would be in their best interest to avoid being like the United States.
Taiwan was my first choice only because they have had great success in a small amount of time. Although I like the British system and their ideas on Doctors receiving incentives and bonuses by getting their patients healthier. I also admired that the United Kingdom became a world leader in preventative medicine. Preventative measures are the best method overall.
In my personal opinion I believe that all the systems have failed to reach a happy balance. However, if I was to have to choose a system I would have to say Japan has done a pretty good job balancing private interests and public good because private businesses own the hospitals benefitting them and there is no greater public good than the fact that they have no wait to see the doctors. Even though Japan’s healthcare system is flawed in many ways such as the hospitals going broke and having to ask the banks for money and the fact that there is no room for benefit to the doctors. The system has a few good things going for it. One big example I believe that they benefit from is the once a year annual doctors visits, now this to me is something that should be acquired throughout the United States. Annual health checks wouldn’t only benefit the citizens of the United States but prevent the outbreak of diseases and save people and insurance companies the trouble of paying most of those annual flu bills. These annual visits help maintain the health of the country. As sad as it is for me to admit another gigantic thing going for them is their good diet. This is a leading factor and the key to how their healthcare system thrives. I don’t mean to be down trotting our country even more but we have issues with obesity and fast food binges. For most people on the go it’s the easiest way to get a decent dinner. While for others it has become some sort of a bad habit. They in contrast have a healthy diet of rice and vegetables, that helps them maintain their health. Another key part which I took out of the movie was that Japan brings more to the table then just good health. They also make most of the major machinery used in the U.S. like the ultrasound machines and CT scanners. In fact, they are capable of making cheaper machinery for themselves to use rather than the expensive ones they sell us. Therefore they save money in the process which is probably one of the big reasons why their system works. Dr.’s getting paid a fixed rate?! Why it’s never been heard of, but yes it is done in Japan. Also there is a fixed rate on surgeries which I think is even better. Which in fact ties into my last point they pay their monthly insurance into a social insurance fund which I think is good because everyone pays the same price. In conclusion, I like Japan’s healthcare system even though it has some major flaws, but it rocks! It is very well organized and self-efficient.
After watching Frontlines: Sick Around the World, it is clear to see that the United States has some work to do. Most if not all the countries, I believe, have a decent healthcare system. The United Kingdom has no co-payments(for most services) and no premium because it is funded by taxation(funded through taxes which are much higher than ours). This is the only country out of the other four that has a healthcare style like this. All the other countries have premiums ranging(for the average family) from two-hundred and eighty to seven-hundred and fifty dollars. Japan, Germany, and Switzerland all require citizens to have health insurance and can be referred to as a social insurance system. However, they do differ. Switzerland and Japan are more alike where health insurance is through work or purchased. If you cannot afford it, you are given public assistance in Japan, and government assistance in Switzerland where you are also assigned a coverage company. Unlike Japan where you may be assigned to a public fund, in Germany you can select your own insurance company. The United Kingdom has gatekeepers; doctors who try and help you before a specialist is required. However, Japan, Germany, Taiwan, and Switzerland do not have gatekeepers and you can go see a specialist right away. A large issue that everyone has a problem with is waiting. Waiting in countries like Taiwan, Japan, and Switzerland is no problem. In the United Kingdom, however, waits are common. A couple of countries have an issue with healthcare costs being too low. Japan and Taiwan keep expenses down therefore hospitals are operating at below par. It is my belief that the United Kingdom has the best balance between private interests and public good. Everyone receives healthcare that pays taxes so the public is covered. The people who want private care are also covered. It is optional to go to private care if you desire. It is not mandatory, therefore, cost comes out of pocket and has no effect on the public. Therefore, there is a balance between public and private healthcare.
The documentary Frontline Sick Around the World, compared the health care systems of five different countries, Britain, Japan, Germany, Taiwan, and Switzerland. On comparing and contrasting the different health care systems of the five countries, all countries portray health care systems which illustrated both positive and negative aspects of universal health care coverage for all citizens. Personally, I feel that the Switzerland health care system did the best job of balancing private interests and public good. In Switzerland, everyone in the country is covered and has access to health care. The Swiss use a social insurance system which was voted in by a national referendum in 1994. However when the law passed, 94% of the population already had voluntary insurance. When the social insurance became a law, now all Swiss citizens were now required to have health insurance coverage. Those that were not covered were automatically assigned to a company. The government provides assistance to those who can’t afford the premiums. Switzerland mandated that insurance companies are not allowed to make a profit on basic care and they are also prohibited from only insuring young and healthy applicants. However insurance companies are allowed to make a profit on supplemental insurance. The insurance companies also negotiate with providers to set standard prices for services to help keep cost from escalating. Drug prices are standardized and set by the government. The Switzerland health care system does not have a gatekeeper. This means that citizens are allowed to see whoever they want. However, some insurance plans do require participants to see a certain doctor or they provide a discount for participants who see and use certain doctors.
When comparing the five countries, Switzerland did have the second highest percentage of GDP spent on health care at 11.6, where as Japan had the lowest at 8 and the United States had the highest at 15.3 but not every single citizen is covered by health insurance in the United States. Switzerland had the second highest life expectancy rate at 81.3 years, with Japan having the highest at 82.1 years and the United States having the lowest life expectancy at 77 years of age. As far as infant mortality rate, Switzerland fell right in the middle at 4.2 and Japan again had the lowest rate at 2.8 and the United States had the highest at rate of 6.8 deaths per live 1000 births.
In comparing what is available to the Swiss citizens and the statistics as far as the quality of health care they are receiving, I feel Switzerland did a good job of not only covering all their citizens but they were also receiving quality care as reflected by their long life expectancies. The Swiss government was not going in the red from running a universal or socialized health care system, and insurance companies did have the ability to make a profit in some areas of the health care system. The Swiss health care system does a very good job of balancing private interest and public good.
In watching the documentary “Sick around the world”, I was surprised to learn that there were numerous other countries around the globe that have implemented health care systems that are working way better than ours. These countries had health cares systems, where the people never saw a medical bill or if they did the cost would be ten times smaller than in the U.S. For instance in England people were actually encouraged to go to the doctor, not only does this benefit the citizens but the doctors would receive a bonus for meeting a certain patient quota. Also, NO ONE is denied health care. How is it we The United States, one of the most powerful countries in the world, fail miserably at simply making sure that our citizens have health care? It’s absolutely ridiculous that in one of our closest allies (England) anyone could walk into a hospital and get care without ever seeing a medical bill! Even more interesting, in countries like Germany for instance or Taiwan the insurance companies actually fought over the consumer’s business, it wasn’t the other way around like in the U.S. The only negative thing I noticed about these healthcare programs were the medical care takers (doctors, nurses, ect.) did not make nearly as much as those that work in the U.S. do. And to add to that, many of the hospitals faced a lack in funds. But, besides those two issues, the one question that kept coming to my mind during this video was why don’t we take these countries as an example of how health care can successfully be managed and learn from it or mold into a system that will better benefit us? The one country that stood out the most was Japan. I thought it was a great idea to have a national book of prices for medical operations and procedures. That way the prices could never substantially change and people would always know what to expect price wise. Another thing was the amount of money it cost for a citizen to stay in the hospital; one night in a room by yourself cost 90.00 yen! Here in America a stay in the hospital would cost you some where in the neighbor hood of at least 300 dollars. It’s incredible to see the huge difference between the healthcare we pay for, and work for versus the healthcare that all citizens in numerous other countries can get for pretty much free or little charge.
In the video Frontline we looked at the healthcare systems of the top best health outcomes countries that include: UK, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, and Taiwan. All these countries believe in healthcare being a fundamental right. They have healthy people, with longer life spans, and all these people claim to be happy wit their healthcare system. They all contrast on how they get the funds to healthcare, but they all have good different ideas, that obviously work. The UK funds through taxation, Germany through employers and "sickness funds", Switzerland uses private insurance companies, Japan has the government that regulates, and Taiwan has a "smart card". I actually like the "smart card" idea, and I think we should have something similar. None of these countries have a gatekeeper except for the UK, but they do have medical homes that help. All these countries also spend too little on healthcare, which they spend less than half then what we do. They all have little to no wait at all time to see get treated, and people get the chance to decide for themselves what kind of doctor they want to see at the time they need it, or don't. All these countries have some differences, but they have more things in common which are the important things. Everybody has healthcare and they don't go broke for it, and they are not denied healthcare for being poor or not a citizen there. Whatever these countries are doing, is right, because they do have the healthiest people in the world.
I was very amazed from learning how other countries have a better established health care system than the U.S. has after watching Frontline’s Sick Around the World documentary. The first country of the documentary was the United Kingdom. The British employ socialism; the government pays for health care as this is funded by taxes. People pay nothing else. Hospital doctors get paid in salaries and patients need to see a preventive care GP (general practitioner or gatekeeper doctor) before going to a specialist. The downsides are long waiting lists and patients can’t choose where they would like to be treated for the most part. The next country was Japan. The Japanese have a system in which all of the citizens are required to have health insurance. They have set prices for every medical procedure, even in the film the Japanese doctor is seen checking on a notebook with the equivalent price of staying the night at the hospital (about $20 dollars). It is also mentioned that the hospital doctors don’t make as much money as in the U.S. The medical costs of Japan are so low that they’ve became its own impediment to perfection. Next, we have Germany. The Germans invented social insurance and are free of buying their own insurance from a vast list of “sickness funds” (which are nonprofit). The curious thing about these insurances is that they actually compete to gain more members despite not making much money out of it. The German have a single-payment system set among the own doctors, who may not earn as much as an American doctor. The most surprising nation of the documentary was Taiwan. The Taiwanese put together all of these working concepts from other countries’ health care systems to create their own. The result was a social insurance structure (all the people must have insurance), much influenced by the Japanese and German systems. Moreover, there is only one insurer and is run by the government which keeps everything in order, such as administrative costs. Unlike the Japanese, the Taiwanese keep track of the medical history of a patient using an electronic card. Taiwan has one of the lowest costs for health care worldwide, and at the same time one of the highest growth in population being provided with health care. To me, Taiwan is the system that has done the best job of balancing private interests and public good, followed closely by Japan. The last country was Switzerland. The Swiss are structured very similarly as the Japanese. The insurance companies in Switzerland aren’t allowed to make a profit from basic care (much like the Germans), and prices for medical services are discussed with the providers. Drug prices are set by the government. What it comes up to is that the Swiss system is far more expensive than the previous systems, but still better than the American one! Although all of these systems have obvious flaws, they are very effective systems when it comes to providing health care for their people. Many of these countries’ practitioners don’t earn closely as much than the ones in the U.S., or most of their insurance companies are nonprofit but still surprisingly competitive. It is clear that they put much emphasis on having all of the citizens covered; even the people that can’t afford medical insurance are supported by their own governments. The average family premium is way cheaper than in the United States and free in the United Kingdom. The copayments are not so bad either. Four of the five nations in the documentary are classified as First World countries with the exception of Taiwan. These countries have well-established, first-class health care systems, something that the American system lacks. Perhaps we should take Taiwan as an inspiration and learn from what they’ve accomplished in 15 years.
After watching Frontline: “Sick around the world” I see that many other countries such as the UK, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, and Taiwan have all really good health systems but all not perfect. I believe that the country that has done a best job of balancing private interests and public good is Switzerland. I believe this because there system is worked by private insurance companies. The private insurance benefit from this type of health care because they negotiate as a group. Even though they cannot make a profit on basic care they can make a profit on supplemental insurance. The cost for all the insurance companies are the same as for the medicine. They negotiate the prices for services and for all the costs. These insurance are picked through the employer. As for the poor they still get covered. Everyone in Switzerland is covered and has access to health care. Even though they can sometimes get bills, they never go bankrupt because of this matter. Every Swiss citizen was required to have insurance after it was passed not to long ago as a law. Those that were not covered they had to be assigned to one. In the other hand many of these countries don’t even send out bills its just totally free, but in many of these countries they are in 50% deficit. Like in Taiwan and Japan people spend too little in health care that’s why there’s a big deficit. Not too say that they do have a really good health care system in Taiwan for example uses “Smart Cards” for all patients that obtains all their medical history. In Taiwan the administrative cost is less that 2% which is a big difference than in the U.S. In the UK the health care system is operated through taxation. They do have a gatekeeper which by the way gets bonuses for preventive care excellence. All these are really great ideas for a good health care. Even though they are all run differently they are a few similarities between them. They all believe that health care is a right for all their citizens. Another thing is that they all negotiate as a group, government or private companies that benefits all citizens. These are all good health care systems, and even though they are not perfect they are a good way to go maybe the U.S. should take all of these systems and get something good out of it!
In regards to the documentary that was discussed in Frontline’s Sick Around the World. It was very interesting to see the difference in the health care systems within the seven countries discussed. It is amazing after listening to everyone that there are no bankruptcy reported. I am ashamed with how the United States and there health care has financially ruined hundreds of thousands of people and forced them into bankruptcy or credit problems. Therefore you can see why the other countries do not have these problems. Most of these countries have fixed amounts that they stand by, they set a budget and they do not charge over and beyond. They still provide insurance to everyone; they even have Social Insurance for those who can’t afford it. I thought it was interesting concept with Germany, where basically, the healthy pay for the sick and the rich pay for the poor. Out of all of these countries everyone was happy, nobody seemed frustrated or disappointed in there health care. Taiwan was the most interesting for me, they did so much research before they made there decision on how they wanted there health care plan to work. They looked into 13 different countries to see how they handled there health care before they made their final health care plan. Everyone was covered with insurance by the government, there was no gatekeeper. The best concept I liked was the smart card. This card regulated the care for all there providers, it made it possible for doctors to view health records, they could see what doctors were seeing them, and what prescriptions they were or have been on; and for what reasons as well to regulate if a patient was going to the doctor to regularly, they could find out what the problem was and resolve it quickly.
Switzerland seems to have the best health care plan. They had a universal coverage, they voted that everyone is entitled to health care. Supplemental insurance was made available in which it made insurance companies a opportunity to make a profit instead of being in a deficit. Drug prices were standardized and set by the government. There was no gate keepers that didnt allow a person not to go to a doctor without a referral.
In regards to all these other countries they all have some differences, but they have more things in common which are basic needs, but I think that Switzerland still balanced private interest and public good better than any of the other countries. They proved that there health care is a right not a privilege.
It seems to me that there are two different types of governments that have two different ways of running their health care systems. On one hand we have Great Britain that the government takes care of medical bills “they don’t pay enough for health care” and then we have America that medical bills are so outrageous that Americans have to have insurance to even afford any type of medical bill. What would be better for you, Trying to afford insurance so you can afford to go to the doctor or not having to worry about money and just going to the doctor when you are sick? I believe Great Britain has a better system it seems to be working, people are happy, and do not want the system the US has. I have learned from life lessons that if a majority of people dislikes something most of the time there is something that is not right when you see people in Great Britain protesting against US ways and happy about the way things are that would seen like they are doing the best job with public health. It shows that they care about their people and they use doctors to prioritize which people need more care than others and they set up plans for them without being overly expensive. I wish one day that the US can fix its problems in its health care system instead of people going into debt over medical bills one day I hope that we can get to a point where we do not pay enough for medical.
Posts
12 comments:
After watch the documentary Sick Around the World I felt cheated buy the American government, how is it that other country that are not nearly as wealthy as the US can find a way to provide ALL their population with healthcare. I thought the healthcare system in Taiwan was brilliant; although, it was not prefect it has all the components to be the best. The way the system runs by a card that holds all information and allow you to bill from that very card, that alone will save so much money you can eliminate 75% of your administrant cost. Also I like the policies about if you go to your physician to many times in a period the government will come out and visit with you , I like this because this can stop the people who just want to go to the doctor because they need someone to talk to that day. The major component that turned me on about the way the government in Taiwan believe that all should be covered and if you loss your job your still covered. Love it, just like the correspondent said “when you become unemployed that is the time you need healthcare the most”. I just can’t understand what the government in the US is thinking, if I had the chance to tell congress what I think about our healthcare system I would say “The US has one of the worst healthcare systems and they have no value for the human life’s as a whole, stop forcing on my education and forces on my health.”
After watching "sick around the world" I would have to say that the Taiwanese Health care system is probably the most effective one so far. At least from what the documentary showed. I liked parts of all the systems, not including the US, but I also diagreed with parts of them such as Germany and Japan. The fact that their doctors dont make enough money to have such a great living as the doctors here do and thats because everything here is so outrageously over priced and that bothers me. I guess I would prefer that everyone is getting the needed health care and check ups rather than doctors having a fancy living. I just feel they should receive a decent pay for what they do. The fact that you are still fully covered even if you do lose your job is something that has me in awe. Who offers that here? No one that i know of. If you lose your job, you lose your benefits unless you have put 20 plus years or more into that comapny and even then, who knows what they could come up with to have a reason why you dont qualify for the continued benefits even only for a few months. Having a health card with all your information to me is way more effective then medical records being faxed from dr to dr. Things get lost, people who dont need to read it do, and its just something I would be happy to have on me instead of everyone else. Not sure if they said they also keep copies but from what I understood, that card is yours to take and keep. I think the US needs to figure out a system that will benefit everyone and anyone in the way they NEED not want. Stop over pricing, stop limiting, there is no reason why everyone should be helped with some sort of healthcare that works with their financial situation. Its sad that some people have to go bankrupt in order to maintain their health and get treatment.
Of all the healthcare systems discussed in the documentary “Sick Around the World”, I found that the Taiwanese are most effective. Considering that in the late 80's they had the worst healthcare system according to them, "Even worse than the United States." In addition, more than half of the Taiwanese had no health care. To find a solution Taiwan consulted experts and examined 10-15 countries before coming to a conclusion. They pick only the effective aspects and plans then avoided repeating the mistakes other countries made within their healthcare plan. They compared their healthcare selection tactic to a "Car" by selecting different international parts to make the perfect domestic car. Taiwan's plan was put together and executed well. It was smart of them to study other countries and avoided repeating mistakes. Initially they thought that examining the US, the richest country in the world, would be the wisest thing to do until they saw all the problems and decided it would be in their best interest to avoid being like the United States.
Taiwan was my first choice only because they have had great success in a small amount of time. Although I like the British system and their ideas on Doctors receiving incentives and bonuses by getting their patients healthier. I also admired that the United Kingdom became a world leader in preventative medicine. Preventative measures are the best method overall.
In my personal opinion I believe that all the systems have failed to reach a happy balance. However, if I was to have to choose a system I would have to say Japan has done a pretty good job balancing private interests and public good because private businesses own the hospitals benefitting them and there is no greater public good than the fact that they have no wait to see the doctors.
Even though Japan’s healthcare system is flawed in many ways such as the hospitals going broke and having to ask the banks for money and the fact that there is no room for benefit to the doctors. The system has a few good things going for it. One big example I believe that they benefit from is the once a year annual doctors visits, now this to me is something that should be acquired throughout the United States. Annual health checks wouldn’t only benefit the citizens of the United States but prevent the outbreak of diseases and save people and insurance companies the trouble of paying most of those annual flu bills. These annual visits help maintain the health of the country.
As sad as it is for me to admit another gigantic thing going for them is their good diet. This is a leading factor and the key to how their healthcare system thrives. I don’t mean to be down trotting our country even more but we have issues with obesity and fast food binges. For most people on the go it’s the easiest way to get a decent dinner. While for others it has become some sort of a bad habit. They in contrast have a healthy diet of rice and vegetables, that helps them maintain their health.
Another key part which I took out of the movie was that Japan brings more to the table then just good health. They also make most of the major machinery used in the U.S. like the ultrasound machines and CT scanners. In fact, they are capable of making cheaper machinery for themselves to use rather than the expensive ones they sell us. Therefore they save money in the process which is probably one of the big reasons why their system works.
Dr.’s getting paid a fixed rate?! Why it’s never been heard of, but yes it is done in Japan. Also there is a fixed rate on surgeries which I think is even better. Which in fact ties into my last point they pay their monthly insurance into a social insurance fund which I think is good because everyone pays the same price.
In conclusion, I like Japan’s healthcare system even though it has some major flaws, but it rocks! It is very well organized and self-efficient.
After watching Frontlines: Sick Around the World, it is clear to see that the United States has some work to do. Most if not all the countries, I believe, have a decent healthcare system. The United Kingdom has no co-payments(for most services) and no premium because it is funded by taxation(funded through taxes which are much higher than ours). This is the only country out of the other four that has a healthcare style like this. All the other countries have premiums ranging(for the average family) from two-hundred and eighty to seven-hundred and fifty dollars. Japan, Germany, and Switzerland all require citizens to have health insurance and can be referred to as a social insurance system. However, they do differ. Switzerland and Japan are more alike where health insurance is through work or purchased. If you cannot afford it, you are given public assistance in Japan, and government assistance in Switzerland where you are also assigned a coverage company. Unlike Japan where you may be assigned to a public fund, in Germany you can select your own insurance company. The United Kingdom has gatekeepers; doctors who try and help you before a specialist is required. However, Japan, Germany, Taiwan, and Switzerland do not have gatekeepers and you can go see a specialist right away. A large issue that everyone has a problem with is waiting. Waiting in countries like Taiwan, Japan, and Switzerland is no problem. In the United Kingdom, however, waits are common. A couple of countries have an issue with healthcare costs being too low. Japan and Taiwan keep expenses down therefore hospitals are operating at below par.
It is my belief that the United Kingdom has the best balance between private interests and public good. Everyone receives healthcare that pays taxes so the public is covered. The people who want private care are also covered. It is optional to go to private care if you desire. It is not mandatory, therefore, cost comes out of pocket and has no effect on the public. Therefore, there is a balance between public and private healthcare.
The documentary Frontline Sick Around the World, compared the health care systems of five different countries, Britain, Japan, Germany, Taiwan, and Switzerland. On comparing and contrasting the different health care systems of the five countries, all countries portray health care systems which illustrated both positive and negative aspects of universal health care coverage for all citizens. Personally, I feel that the Switzerland health care system did the best job of balancing private interests and public good.
In Switzerland, everyone in the country is covered and has access to health care. The Swiss use a social insurance system which was voted in by a national referendum in 1994. However when the law passed, 94% of the population already had voluntary insurance. When the social insurance became a law, now all Swiss citizens were now required to have health insurance coverage. Those that were not covered were automatically assigned to a company. The government provides assistance to those who can’t afford the premiums. Switzerland mandated that insurance companies are not allowed to make a profit on basic care and they are also prohibited from only insuring young and healthy applicants. However insurance companies are allowed to make a profit on supplemental insurance. The insurance companies also negotiate with providers to set standard prices for services to help keep cost from escalating. Drug prices are standardized and set by the government. The Switzerland health care system does not have a gatekeeper. This means that citizens are allowed to see whoever they want. However, some insurance plans do require participants to see a certain doctor or they provide a discount for participants who see and use certain doctors.
When comparing the five countries, Switzerland did have the second highest percentage of GDP spent on health care at 11.6, where as Japan had the lowest at 8 and the United States had the highest at 15.3 but not every single citizen is covered by health insurance in the United States. Switzerland had the second highest life expectancy rate at 81.3 years, with Japan having the highest at 82.1 years and the United States having the lowest life expectancy at 77 years of age. As far as infant mortality rate, Switzerland fell right in the middle at 4.2 and Japan again had the lowest rate at 2.8 and the United States had the highest at rate of 6.8 deaths per live 1000 births.
In comparing what is available to the Swiss citizens and the statistics as far as the quality of health care they are receiving, I feel Switzerland did a good job of not only covering all their citizens but they were also receiving quality care as reflected by their long life expectancies. The Swiss government was not going in the red from running a universal or socialized health care system, and insurance companies did have the ability to make a profit in some areas of the health care system. The Swiss health care system does a very good job of balancing private interest and public good.
In watching the documentary “Sick around the world”, I was surprised to learn that there were numerous other countries around the globe that have implemented health care systems that are working way better than ours. These countries had health cares systems, where the people never saw a medical bill or if they did the cost would be ten times smaller than in the U.S. For instance in England people were actually encouraged to go to the doctor, not only does this benefit the citizens but the doctors would receive a bonus for meeting a certain patient quota. Also, NO ONE is denied health care. How is it we The United States, one of the most powerful countries in the world, fail miserably at simply making sure that our citizens have health care? It’s absolutely ridiculous that in one of our closest allies (England) anyone could walk into a hospital and get care without ever seeing a medical bill! Even more interesting, in countries like Germany for instance or Taiwan the insurance companies actually fought over the consumer’s business, it wasn’t the other way around like in the U.S. The only negative thing I noticed about these healthcare programs were the medical care takers (doctors, nurses, ect.) did not make nearly as much as those that work in the U.S. do. And to add to that, many of the hospitals faced a lack in funds. But, besides those two issues, the one question that kept coming to my mind during this video was why don’t we take these countries as an example of how health care can successfully be managed and learn from it or mold into a system that will better benefit us? The one country that stood out the most was Japan. I thought it was a great idea to have a national book of prices for medical operations and procedures. That way the prices could never substantially change and people would always know what to expect price wise. Another thing was the amount of money it cost for a citizen to stay in the hospital; one night in a room by yourself cost 90.00 yen! Here in America a stay in the hospital would cost you some where in the neighbor hood of at least 300 dollars. It’s incredible to see the huge difference between the healthcare we pay for, and work for versus the healthcare that all citizens in numerous other countries can get for pretty much free or little charge.
In the video Frontline we looked at the healthcare systems of the top best health outcomes countries that include: UK, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, and Taiwan. All these countries believe in healthcare being a fundamental right. They have healthy people, with longer life spans, and all these people claim to be happy wit their healthcare system. They all contrast on how they get the funds to healthcare, but they all have good different ideas, that obviously work. The UK funds through taxation, Germany through employers and "sickness funds", Switzerland uses private insurance companies, Japan has the government that regulates, and Taiwan has a "smart card". I actually like the "smart card" idea, and I think we should have something similar. None of these countries have a gatekeeper except for the UK, but they do have medical homes that help. All these countries also spend too little on healthcare, which they spend less than half then what we do. They all have little to no wait at all time to see get treated, and people get the chance to decide for themselves what kind of doctor they want to see at the time they need it, or don't. All these countries have some differences, but they have more things in common which are the important things. Everybody has healthcare and they don't go broke for it, and they are not denied healthcare for being poor or not a citizen there. Whatever these countries are doing, is right, because they do have the healthiest people in the world.
I was very amazed from learning how other countries have a better established health care system than the U.S. has after watching Frontline’s Sick Around the World documentary. The first country of the documentary was the United Kingdom. The British employ socialism; the government pays for health care as this is funded by taxes. People pay nothing else. Hospital doctors get paid in salaries and patients need to see a preventive care GP (general practitioner or gatekeeper doctor) before going to a specialist. The downsides are long waiting lists and patients can’t choose where they would like to be treated for the most part. The next country was Japan. The Japanese have a system in which all of the citizens are required to have health insurance. They have set prices for every medical procedure, even in the film the Japanese doctor is seen checking on a notebook with the equivalent price of staying the night at the hospital (about $20 dollars). It is also mentioned that the hospital doctors don’t make as much money as in the U.S. The medical costs of Japan are so low that they’ve became its own impediment to perfection. Next, we have Germany. The Germans invented social insurance and are free of buying their own insurance from a vast list of “sickness funds” (which are nonprofit). The curious thing about these insurances is that they actually compete to gain more members despite not making much money out of it. The German have a single-payment system set among the own doctors, who may not earn as much as an American doctor. The most surprising nation of the documentary was Taiwan. The Taiwanese put together all of these working concepts from other countries’ health care systems to create their own. The result was a social insurance structure (all the people must have insurance), much influenced by the Japanese and German systems. Moreover, there is only one insurer and is run by the government which keeps everything in order, such as administrative costs. Unlike the Japanese, the Taiwanese keep track of the medical history of a patient using an electronic card. Taiwan has one of the lowest costs for health care worldwide, and at the same time one of the highest growth in population being provided with health care. To me, Taiwan is the system that has done the best job of balancing private interests and public good, followed closely by Japan. The last country was Switzerland. The Swiss are structured very similarly as the Japanese. The insurance companies in Switzerland aren’t allowed to make a profit from basic care (much like the Germans), and prices for medical services are discussed with the providers. Drug prices are set by the government. What it comes up to is that the Swiss system is far more expensive than the previous systems, but still better than the American one! Although all of these systems have obvious flaws, they are very effective systems when it comes to providing health care for their people. Many of these countries’ practitioners don’t earn closely as much than the ones in the U.S., or most of their insurance companies are nonprofit but still surprisingly competitive. It is clear that they put much emphasis on having all of the citizens covered; even the people that can’t afford medical insurance are supported by their own governments. The average family premium is way cheaper than in the United States and free in the United Kingdom. The copayments are not so bad either. Four of the five nations in the documentary are classified as First World countries with the exception of Taiwan. These countries have well-established, first-class health care systems, something that the American system lacks. Perhaps we should take Taiwan as an inspiration and learn from what they’ve accomplished in 15 years.
After watching Frontline: “Sick around the world” I see that many other countries such as the UK, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, and Taiwan have all really good health systems but all not perfect. I believe that the country that has done a best job of balancing private interests and public good is Switzerland. I believe this because there system is worked by private insurance companies. The private insurance benefit from this type of health care because they negotiate as a group. Even though they cannot make a profit on basic care they can make a profit on supplemental insurance. The cost for all the insurance companies are the same as for the medicine. They negotiate the prices for services and for all the costs. These insurance are picked through the employer. As for the poor they still get covered. Everyone in Switzerland is covered and has access to health care. Even though they can sometimes get bills, they never go bankrupt because of this matter. Every Swiss citizen was required to have insurance after it was passed not to long ago as a law. Those that were not covered they had to be assigned to one.
In the other hand many of these countries don’t even send out bills its just totally free, but in many of these countries they are in 50% deficit. Like in Taiwan and Japan people spend too little in health care that’s why there’s a big deficit. Not too say that they do have a really good health care system in Taiwan for example uses “Smart Cards” for all patients that obtains all their medical history. In Taiwan the administrative cost is less that 2% which is a big difference than in the U.S. In the UK the health care system is operated through taxation. They do have a gatekeeper which by the way gets bonuses for preventive care excellence. All these are really great ideas for a good health care. Even though they are all run differently they are a few similarities between them. They all believe that health care is a right for all their citizens. Another thing is that they all negotiate as a group, government or private companies that benefits all citizens. These are all good health care systems, and even though they are not perfect they are a good way to go maybe the U.S. should take all of these systems and get something good out of it!
In regards to the documentary that was discussed in Frontline’s Sick Around the World. It was very interesting to see the difference in the health care systems within the seven countries discussed. It is amazing after listening to everyone that there are no bankruptcy reported. I am ashamed with how the United States and there health care has financially ruined hundreds of thousands of people and forced them into bankruptcy or credit problems. Therefore you can see why the other countries do not have these problems. Most of these countries have fixed amounts that they stand by, they set a budget and they do not charge over and beyond. They still provide insurance to everyone; they even have Social Insurance for those who can’t afford it. I thought it was interesting concept with Germany, where basically, the healthy pay for the sick and the rich pay for the poor. Out of all of these countries everyone was happy, nobody seemed frustrated or disappointed in there health care.
Taiwan was the most interesting for me, they did so much research before they made there decision on how they wanted there health care plan to work. They looked into 13 different countries to see how they handled there health care before they made their final health care plan. Everyone was covered with insurance by the government, there was no gatekeeper. The best concept I liked was the smart card. This card regulated the care for all there providers, it made it possible for doctors to view health records, they could see what doctors were seeing them, and what prescriptions they were or have been on; and for what reasons as well to regulate if a patient was going to the doctor to regularly, they could find out what the problem was and resolve it quickly.
Switzerland seems to have the best health care plan. They had a universal coverage, they voted that everyone is entitled to health care. Supplemental insurance was made available in which it made insurance companies a opportunity to make a profit instead of being in a deficit. Drug prices were standardized and set by the government. There was no gate keepers that didnt allow a person not to go to a doctor without a referral.
In regards to all these other countries they all have some differences, but they have more things in common which are basic needs, but I think that Switzerland still balanced private interest and public good better than any of the other countries. They proved that there health care is a right not a privilege.
It seems to me that there are two different types of governments that have two different ways of running their health care systems. On one hand we have Great Britain that the government takes care of medical bills “they don’t pay enough for health care” and then we have America that medical bills are so outrageous that Americans have to have insurance to even afford any type of medical bill. What would be better for you, Trying to afford insurance so you can afford to go to the doctor or not having to worry about money and just going to the doctor when you are sick? I believe Great Britain has a better system it seems to be working, people are happy, and do not want the system the US has. I have learned from life lessons that if a majority of people dislikes something most of the time there is something that is not right when you see people in Great Britain protesting against US ways and happy about the way things are that would seen like they are doing the best job with public health. It shows that they care about their people and they use doctors to prioritize which people need more care than others and they set up plans for them without being overly expensive. I wish one day that the US can fix its problems in its health care system instead of people going into debt over medical bills one day I hope that we can get to a point where we do not pay enough for medical.
Post a Comment