Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Studies on universal health care
Comparison of the healthcare system in Canada and the United States
Health care system around the world
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Studies on universal health care
No two welfare states, or welfare systems are the same, all of them are unique. They are all run differently, and offer different benefits for different costs to their citizens. All welfare systems in a way create a class system based on who uses the welfare provided and who does, who has access to the social programs in place and who has no access. When one doctor and one patient, in 2005, challenged the Québec Health Insurance Act and the Hospital Insurance Act to allow private health care in Québec they changed the potential of the Canadian universal health care system. President Barack Obama is currently making a very serious attempt to bring a successful universal health care to the United States of America, which will drastically change the lives of Americans, as well as the American welfare system entirely. Interestingly the changes that were fought for in 2005 in Canada would result in creating a gap between people who could afford better health care and the others who could not, yet the changes that President Obama is fighting tooth and nail to create will, if effective narrow the gap between those who have access to health care and those who do not. It seems that some middle ground is trying to be found between the two countries.
In 2005, the supreme court of Canada ruled that the Québec health insurance act and the hospital insurance act prohibiting private medical insurance in instances when long wait times are a reality, violated the Québec charter of human rights and freedoms. The vote was 4 to 3. This ruling is only binding in the province of Québec but does set a president should the argument come up in other provinces or territories. Leading this fight was a 73-year-old man, George Zeliotis, who was a patient on...
... middle of paper ...
...w long the wait list is for this service, it cannot be privately insured or produced and sold in Canada. Yet in 2005, when the Supreme Court of Canada found this to be in violation of Québec’s constitution, the possibility of change was born. Since the Chaoulli v. Québec (Attorney General), in Chaoulli’s favour has led to the expansion of private facilities offering core care in and outside of Québec. In other Canadian provinces, it is understood that private health care will not be charged because of the precedent set in Québec. This same precedent has led many to believe this sets the standard to understand that Canada is well on its way to developing a two-tier health care system. This would change the class system in the country drastically.
If Canada were to adopt a two-tier health care system nationally, it would result in a clear division between classes.
A more sudden, but perhaps equally profound event is the adoption in 1982 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Whereas before the adoption of the Charter Canadian legislatures were supreme, having power without limit within their jurisdictions, they now have debatable supremacy within altered jurisdictions. Moreover, although no powers or rights have been explicitly ‘reserved’ to the people, supporters of the charter nevertheless appear to give Canadians hope that the possibility may exist.
Tommy Douglas was a Canadian social- democratic politician, who became the premier of Saskatchewan in 1944. Tommy Douglas believed that it was his responsibility as premier to improve the lives of ordinary people. In fact, he had experienced firsthand people dying, because they did not have enough money for the treatment they needed. It was from that day he said “If I ever had the power I would, if it were humanly possible, see that the financial barrier between those who need health services and those who have health services was forever removed.” So, when he became premier he enacted the first Medicare plan in Saskatchewan, which in 1972 was adopted in all provinces in Canada. The universal health care system has many advantages and should be adopted by other countries as well. This system would decrease the world’s death rate, there are also many people out there who cannot afford health care and it would be easier with universal health care to have everyone under one system.
An analysis of the US and Canada’s systems reveals advantages and drawbacks within each structure. While it is apparent that both countries could benefit from the adoption of portions of the others system, Canada’s healthcare system offers several benefits over the US system.
O?Beirne, Kate. ?The State of Welfare: An old and tricky question resurfaces.? National Review 54.2 (February 11, 2002): 1--2. Online. Information Access Expanded
In the summer of 1996, Congress finally passed and the President signed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996", transforming the nation's welfare system. The passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act sets the stage for ongoing reconstruction of welfare systems on a state-by-state basis. The combined programs will increase from nearly $100 billion this year to $130 billion per year in 6 years. Programs included are for food stamps, SSI, child nutrition, foster care, the bloss grant program for child- care, and the new block grant to take the place of AFDC. All of those programs will seek $700 billion over the next 6 years, from the taxpayers of America. This program in its reformed mode will cost $55 billion less than it was assumed to cost if there were no changes and the entitlements were left alone. The current welfare system has failed the very families it was intended to serve. If the present welfare system was working so well we would not be here today.
The Canadian health care system promises universality, portability, and accessibility; unfortunately, it faces political challenges of meeting pub...
... wait times and the problem of our physician shortages. Becoming aware of the reasons why our physicians leave Canada, will be the stepping stone to create/match the attractive deals that steal them from us. The shortage of our physicians and the long wait times in the emergency room is closely connected. The government needs to look at all propositions that have been mentioned in order to fix these issues. There are all kinds of advanced health care providers that can help with this problem by aiding in the emergency rooms and remove the burden of overworked physicians. If we organize our health care providers in a new way, the wait times in our emergency rooms could be greatly reduced. The public should take control of their health by not tolerating the present state of affairs. Their health is being harmed by extended wait times and lack of health care workers.
Many policies have shaped Canadian healthcare. In 1962, Saskatchewan enacted the Medical Care Insurance Act (MCIA). The MCIA provided coverage in the province for services provided by physicians. Physicians were allowed to bill the patient for any amount over what the government would pay. Other provinces began considered similar programs. In 1966, the federal government passed the Medical Care Act. Under this act physician services were covered under programs administered at the provincial level. The fees were split at a 50% rate between the federal and provincial governments. Another act, known as the Hospital Act allowed the provinces to develop their own health plans. Some provinces took a more inflexible approach to billing. After these acts were implemente...
The United States is often referred to as a ‘reluctant welfare state.’ There are various reasons for this description. One of the primary reasons for this is the differences and diversity of the political parties which are the motivating forces that control government. The Liberal Party, for instance supports government safety nets and social service programs for those in need. “Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all.” ("Studentnews," 2006) They believe it is the responsibility of government to ensure that the needs of all citizens are met, and to intervene to solve problems. The responsibility of government is to alleviate social ills, to protect civil liberties and sustain individual and human rights. Liberals support most social and human service programs; such as TANF, including long-term welfare, housing programs, government regulated health care, Medicare, Medicaid, social security, and educational funding. Their goal is to create programs that promote equal opportunity regardless of gender, age, race, orientation, nationality or religion, along with many others. Liberals believe that government participation is essential and a means to bring about fairness and justice to the American way of life.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted under the Pierre Trudeau government on April 17, 1982. According to Phillip Bryden, “With the entrenchment of the Charter into the Canadian Constitution, Canadians were not only given an explicit definition of their rights, but the courts were empowered to rule on the constitutionality of government legislation” (101). Prior to 1982, Canada’s central constitutional document was the British North America Act of 1867. According to Kallen, “The BNA Act (the Constitution Act, 1867) makes no explicit reference to human rights” (240). The adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms significantly transformed the operation of Canada’s political system. Presently, Canadians define their needs and complaints in human rights terms. Bryden states, “More and more, interest groups and minorities are turning to the courts, rather than the usual political processes, to make their grievances heard” (101). Since it’s inception in 1982 the Charter has become a very debatable issue. A strong support for the Charter remains, but there also has been much criticism toward the Charter. Academic critics of the Charter such as Robert Martin believe that the Charter is doing more harm than good, and is essentially antidemocratic and UN-Canadian. I believe that Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic, although, the Charter itself represents a democratic document. Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic because the power of the executive is enhanced at the expense of Parliament, and the power of the judiciary is enhanced at the expense of elected officials, although, the notwithstanding clause continues to provide Parliament with a check on...
Universal programs tend to receive greater funding, because taxpayers are incentivized to do so in exchange for future benefits. However, Skocpol fails to entertain the idea that if states increase their revenues, they may be able to provide more services via targeted programs. Lane Kenworthy cites Denmark as an ideal example of a state that can redistribute effectively through targeting. Targeted programs like TANF, SNAP and CHIP are underfunded, but I argue that the US may not be doing its utmost unlike nations such as Denmark. Social welfare programs like TANF and CHIP, are usually funded by either the federal government, the state government or a mixture of both. The amount of money the government can spend on transfers depends on the size of the government’s budget which depends on its tax revenues. In Denmark the top tax rate is 60.4% and its tax revenue(s) is approximately 49% of its GDP. In the US, the top tax rate is 39.6% while its tax revenue(s) is only 25.4% of its GDP. As a result, Denmark can, proportionally, provide more services than the US, but combined with the fact it has a smaller welfare pool than the US, it’s evident where the US is
Canada’s Health Care system is gradually growing to be a major concern in today’s society with providing Canadians with the standard of care they deserve. Health care has become an issue because of the shortage of doctors in Canada; many of them are either going to the U.S.A. or going to other countries to practice in hospitals and clinics. The earning cap imposed by the government has forced doctors to work fewer hours than are necessary to serve the public. Many Canadians are without a doctor to help them with their needs and emergency rooms are filled to capacity with no available beds for those who have to be admitted to the hospital. Waiting time for specialist and specialty tests have become so long that someone diagnosed with a major illness may die before they can be properly treated. Nurses and others in the medical field are overworked and understaffed because the government has made cut-backs to the Health Care System. We live in a country where our health care is a privilege to have, but getting ill is becoming a problem if there is not adequate facilities and professionals to care for the sick. Today’s society is aging longer than ever and will need health care longer than before; patients recovering from hospital stays are being sent home more quickly than ever before, and terminal patients are being sent home for their last days.
The public health care system in Canada is still flawed, proven through the wait times that many patients have to go through. Canadians may wait up to six to nine months for “non-urgent” MRIs . The waiting list is dreary for Canadians, unlike Americans who can get their services immediately through paying out-of-pocket, the long public sector in Alberta waits up to a year for services, the wait for cataract surgery was six weeks ; these waits for some patients put the public health care system to shame, and helps push the idea of the privatized health care system a bettering option for the future of the nation. Additionally, 41 percent of adult Canadians said they experienced a difficulty in accessing hospital and physician care on weekday nights and weekends . Furthermore, it is still evident that Canadians in fact pay a higher income tax compared to Americans, due to the fact that they are paying the fund the health care system through their taxes; however, it is still significantly less to pay for a public health care system than it is privatized . Privatization is further proved as a superior choice with regards to the discharge situation many Canadians face. In Canada, it is common to see patients discharged earlier than recommended due the rising amount of patients using the free-of-charge public health care system, patients are released “quicker and sicker” because of this . Additionally, when discharged, the public health care system does not cover home care and private nurse care ; further proving the notion that there is still some forms of privatization already in the health care system in
Primary health care is the essential step to the Canadian health system. It is often associated with other specialized health care sectors, and community services. Many patients visit various services under primary health care such as family doctors' offices, mental health facilities, nurse practitioners' offices; they make phone calls to health information lines, for example, Tele-health; and receive suggestions from physicians and pharmacists (First Ministers; meeting on healthcare, n.d.). This service can prevent patients from visiting the emergency department, when all that is required is some guidance and advice. Having primary care services can reduce the consumption of acute beds, where only seriously ill patients can use the acute beds when it is available. Primary care not only deals with sickness care, but it helps patients receive preventable measures; it promotes healthy choices (Primary health care, n.d.). The focus on appropriate health care services, when and where they are needed, enhanced the ability of individuals to access primary care in various settings: at home, in a hospital or any number of family health care venues, such as Family Health Teams (FHTs), Community Health Centres (CHCs), or Nurse Practitioner- led clinics. This paper will look at the litigious heated argument in the Romanow Report concerning primary care. It will begin with a discussion of the outcome of the Accord on Health Care Renewal (2003) and The First Ministers' Meeting on the Future of Health in Canada (2004), both referring to primary care, which will then be followed with an assessment and analysis of the different ways in which the accords have been addressed in support of primary care. Followed by a discussion about the changes on ...
Welfare can be defined as “systems by which government agencies provide economic assistance, goods, and services to persons who are unable to care for themselves” (Issitt). The United States welfare system is an extremely complex and unique entity that encompasses ideas and concepts from an abundance of different places. Many people believe the current system is an excellent resource for the population, while others believe the current welfare system requires reform and budget cuts to become effective.