Based on the potential for increased patient choices and autonomy which is in regards to their healthcare I, therefore, support a free for health care. Thus, in a free market, there is increased competition for the patient's services, advancements in technologies and research. Also, based on the prescription of drugs, the cost was relatively more competitive, lower and more available in the health centers for patients to access. More so, on a free market, there are fewer opportunities of monopolies that regulate high cost for services rendered to patients and also limits the choices of coverage. In 2016, according to McKalip, in a free market system, the patients which he referred as consumers would purchase the health insurance cover directly in a competitive market. Therefore, they use the pay out of pocket on a daily basis medical care throughout the year hence they reserve the use of insurance for rare and emergency episodes of medication. These cover will would then cover services as substantially as the market demands as well as the governmental safety nets for medical care.
Moreover, in a free market environment patient have the responsibility of selecting their coverage limits and the cost of services that they can afford based on their health needs and income. The patients are centered care in a free market, and therefore they can prosper as physicians, insurances, and hospitals strive for services based on the affordability and quality of a patient. More so, based on the idea of McLaughlin and McLaughlin, patients drove health care, and also market-driven health care is considered as the forms of a free market system that has been in innovated and effective through the Health Saving Accounts (HSAs) and also in the private option of medication. In the medical sector, there is some supplemental Medicare coverage which helps patients in hospitals such as the secondary Part D coverages which give room for freedom of choice based on the patient level of need and affordability of the services to be offered.
Limitation of a Free Market
- It has the barrier of underutilization by low-income individuals.
- The marginal effect thorough the copays
- The increases in deductibles which may be smaller than expected.
- The quality of information and price may be opaque to patients.
- The issues with informed and educated decision-making limit some individuals from making a proper decision regarding their health care choices.
Additionally, a agree that we should adopt an administered competition style of healthcare which is universal coverage. In a situation where there are multiple suppliers in the free market system, hence the market is strongly affected by a primary buyer who is usually a government creation. A monopsony system worries a lot with a single buyer having control, especially if it were to be the government due to the fear of abuse of power. More so, I like the idea of universal healthcare, even though it does not have issues, I feel the positive outcomes could potentially outweigh the costs. Notably, at some point, we have to ask our self if healthcare is a universal right. Thus, if an individual were to say no, then universal healthcare probably isn`t the best solution, but in my point of view, I do believe healthcare should be a right (McLaughlin, C. P., & McLaughlin, C. D. 2015).
Advantages of universal healthcare
The following are the advantages which are associated with universal healthcare.
- There is equal access to healthcare
- There is improved public healthcare
- Fewer paper works
- Medical bankruptcies will stop
- It encourages entrepreneurship
- Universal healthcare benefits businesses
- It boosts the economy and supports human rights.
Disadvantages of universal health care
The following are the disadvantages which are associated with the universal healthcare. It includes:
- It leads to a socialist state
- There is a long wait of times
- The medical abuse leads to rationing
- It takes time to get there and increases government debt
- Universal healthcare is not technically free
More so, to understand well the ideas of universal healthcare, I would briefly discuss some of the crucial advantages that are supposed to be considered. The most crucial point of universal healthcare is that everyone can have healthcare services which are considered huge. Another aspect is that which I find very extremely beneficial to the patient is the general improvement of the public health. Therefore, because everyone will have the same access to healthcare facilities, the individuals can receive primary care hence it will reduce the amount of illness and establish a healthier individual in the community. Thus, it will lead to increased productivity and also improve the economy.
Moreover, I would discuss some significant disadvantages briefly to the universal healthcare that should be analyzed critically. The global healthcare is a long time wait, and this is a big issue, and we fear that a lot of people have the same problem. More so, the universal healthcare can lead to a very offensive word that we all hate and also it can increase taxes. Notably, in most cases, the government would regulate the services and goods for the universal health care. However, in the administered competition which has multiple suppliers and therefore it is being influenced by a primary buyer of which I think we should avoid some of those issues.
In the McLaughlin article, the box that best fit our personal belief of the role of Government in the healthcare markets is the oligopolistic market competition. In the oligopolistic competition, the market is open and therefore only a few large sellers dominate the market. According to the authors, they affirm that there are at least four providers of goods and services that control up to 40% of the local market. The main reason for my belief that the function of government in the healthcare markets is oligopolistic competition is due to the several research. Therefore, the concentration in most hospital markets has become a concern of the Federal Trade Commission. Based on the author's opinions and ideas, they indicate that the national oligopolies are present in the health sectors such as Medicine-managed care, pharmaceutical distribution, pharmaceuticals, imaging equipment, replacement joints, and pharmacy benefits management.
Notably, before the emergence of the Obama care, most healthcare which deals with insurance markets were mainly dominated by oligopolies. Thus, in my point of view I believe even the after Obama Care, the health insurance companies still regulate a considerable portion of both individual and the employer markets in every nation. Therefore, most American have the insurance healthcare providers since the insurers are adamant to give patients health plan options (Henderson, J. W. 2014). According to my point of view and perspective, we are supposed to move from that healthcare system since it affects employers and consumers tremendously. About the function of the government, it does not try to establish a more innovation that can result in the consumer paying less to receive healthcare services.
In this part, we discuss the role of government in providing quality healthcare market in a state. The primary responsibility of the government in the provision of high-quality healthcare markets to patients is by allowing for the monopsony in most of National Health services. In this case, a monopsony system of market is the same as a monopoly competition market. Thus, the buyer becomes dominant, and he will be in a position to control and monitor the prices of drugs and healthcare services. Notably, the government laws and regulation can only allow one buyer to be a monopsony to negotiate the costs and ensure that the healthcare market sector is not a free market to the health practitioners.
More so, the government is supposed to be a monopsony and also be the sole buyer of drugs in the market since the Healthcare is an urgent need. Thus, all citizens in a state should access easily and affordable prices. The government as the buyer should then regulates the prices of drugs in the healthcare market and therefore suppliers the drugs to different medical services providers. The role of government to control the drug prices is the best strategy that a government can apply to protect the citizens against exploitations by healthcare service providers.
Also, the government should ensure that there is safe and fair competition in the market between the suppliers to improve the efficiency of the monopsony. Thus, when a single buyer dominates the healthcare market, the effect that will result is a reduction in the number of goods and services in a production line in the market (D. McKalip 2016). However, through healthy competition among the suppliers and producers of drugs and health providers in the market, the government can regulate the quantity produced to stop it from dropping below the anticipated amount for the market. In case of any possibility to drop, waives can be used in the market to motivate new firms to enter into the production and supply. Mostly, this procedure in the healthcare market ensures there is a successful monopsony market to enable the government to regulate the healthcare market efficiently.
D. McKalip (2016) Achieving high moral quality, affordable medical care in America through a truly free market.
Henderson, J. W. (2014). Health economics and policy. Australia: Cengage Learning.
McLaughlin, C. P., & McLaughlin, C. D. (2015). Health Policy Analysis: An Interdisciplinary
Cite this page
A Free Market for Health Care Paper Example. (2022, Jul 03). Retrieved from https://proessays.net/essays/a-free-market-for-health-care-paper-example
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the ProEssays website, please click below to request its removal: