Role of the U.S. Government in Healthcare
The role of government in healthcare is a hotly debated topic. Some believe in universal healthcare, in which the government guarantees healthcare to all citizens as a right of citizenship, while others contend that freedom from government involvement in healthcare is preferable. In my opinion, a balance of the two is the most appropriate position to take.
Universal healthcare implies two things-assured ability to obtain healthcare and the government's extensive involvement in healthcare. Where the government funds anything, it wants control, and most things that the government controls become lumbering examples of government bureaucracy, not successful enterprises. It is argued that the United States is the only industrialized nation that does not have universal health care, and the implication is that the nations that do have it offer far better healthcare than those that do not. Statistics do not support this notion, however. Although the World Health Organization's (WHO) ranking shows France and Italy-both nations with universal healthcare-as #1 and #2 in the world, other nations with universal healthcare, such as Australia and Brazil make a much poorer showing--#30 and #111, respectively (Coutsoukis, 2007). The United States' ranking of #32 is not spectacular, but it is far better than that of some universal healthcare nations, which implies that there are other factors at work besides whether a nation has a universal healthcare system (Coutsoukis, 2007). Numerous medical journals report that inequities in healthcare persist even after universal healthcare systems have been implemented. For example, a Canadian study found that location of residence affected heart failure patient outcomes, even within a universal healthcare system (Gamble et al., 2011, p. 317). A U.K. study found that in Finland, which also has universal healthcare, inequities...