The term “Medicare for all” is used to refer to a health situation where all Americans will be insured. Recently, the major issue arising is how to increase coverage or rather how to ensure that the percentage of insured American increases to almost a hundred. Healthcare, being a central issue during the midterm elections, attracts different views from both Republicans and Democrats (Austin & Carroll, 2019). The issue of complete coverage has also emerged as a divisive topic on the trail of presidential campaigns. Some don’t understand what exactly “Medicare for all” implies. Experts support the idea of universal coverage arguing that in most developed countries except the U.S. only 10 to 14 percent of the total population is not insured and also the fact that healthcare provision should be prioritized in a decent society (Austin & Carroll, 2019). According to some individuals, any plans to disregard employer-based coverage are unrealistic. However, if a new coverage program would be implemented, employer-based programs would have to be scraped off (Austin & Carroll, 2019). Majority suggestions are that employer-based coverage is way past time and it should be done away with. Mixed propositions were given regarding the issue of replacing individual coverage with universal coverage and no decision could be reached. Individuals did not support the idea of “no premium” as it is economically and politically unrealistic.
Question 2: Describe a specific real-life situation (other than one discussed in your news article) where the issue at hand has been observed.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Individuals, particularly employed families do not know the type of health coverage to rely on as there are several disadvantages associated with each. Employer-based coverages are not completely reliable as they limit the type of health coverage to be offered. A good example is a newly employed lady who was unable to decide whether she should purchase individual health insurance on top of the employer-based coverage. Employers, though not all, do not offer coverage for all health cases. Privately purchased coverage, on the other hand, is in some instances expensive and unaffordable. This issue closely relates to the country debate on universal coverage. I would personally recommend that universal coverage is implemented and private coverage should be eliminated from the program. This will ensure that every individual is confident and secure.
Question 3: What is your field of study and how do you see it relating to the event or issue in your news article?
Health insurance is a critical concern in Healthcare management which is my field of study. Insured patients get the treatment they require at any time and for whatever disease compared to uninsured patients. Implementing universal coverage would positively impact the health care provision by ensuring that all patients are attended to. Health insurance would also ensure that no patient is delayed because they failed to pay the hospital bills and this would reduce the hospital expenses and ensure that there are no “idling” patients at any particular time. These few strategies could result in great progress in the healthcare facilities.
Question 4: What do you want to know about the issue or event in your news article?
First, it would be important to know what loss individuals would incur if individual health coverages are eliminated so that a reasonable conclusion is reached. Secondly and most importantly, the opinion of the health care practitioners on the issue of universal coverage should be evaluated. Thorough research should be conducted among doctors, nurses and healthcare managers to establish health grounds on universal coverage.
References
Austin Frakt and Carroll, Aaron E. (13th August, 2019). The Tough Calls on 'Medicare for All'. The New York Times. New York.
