Australia's Universal Healthcare System
Healthcare around the world has become a basic economic necessity among highly competitive and progressive nations. Healthcare is the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease or illness but healthcare extends far past the delivery of services to the public. Healthcare is a complex system dealing with many related sectors and plays a crucial role in the structure of government. Among the world’s leading spenders in healthcare, the U.S. ranks at the top spending 17.7% GDP annually (OECD, 2013). But many other industrial nations are finding success with alternative methods to healthcare such as Australia, Sweden, France, etc. Australia, in particular, is having success with their healthcare system but finds themselves spending a fraction
…show more content…
of the cost, annually, Australia spends 8.9% GDP on healthcare (OECD, 2013). The benefits to having a healthy nation are limitless and it is essential for countries to establish a universal form of healthcare. With the world’s ever-growing population, and the emergence into the age of globalization and technology it is crucial to sustain the medical needs of a nation. As most of the world continues to move forward with progressive healthcare reform it is important for the U.S. not to fall behind its peers.
Healthcare in Australia Currently, Australia’s government does not directly provide healthcare to the public but rather funds the national healthcare scheme.
Now a government agent, Medicare, is funded by the government and handles public hospitals, pharmaceuticals, and population health programs. Medicare is able to regulate private healthcare insurance, pharmaceuticals and medical services. Australia’s universal healthcare system, Medicare, provides coverage to all citizens from the time they’re born to the time they die and they also provide coverage for permanent residence. Australia uses a fee schedule to determine the amount of medical services each person is offered under the standard Medicare benefit. This insures that doctors, hospitals, and medical services are paid similar rates for every patient they evaluate (Kane 2012). Although every citizen has access to universal healthcare services, there are people that chose to go through private health insurance which allows patients access to private hospitals and other patient services. Private health insurance plays a symbiotic role in the Australian government due to the regulations set in place such as how people are encouraged through tax penalties for high-income earners and tax rebates for low income earners (Healy, Dugdale …show more content…
11). Medicare has relatively effective troubleshooting program for certain citizens that might need a little more medical attention than others. In order to keep medical fees low, Medicare has established what is known as a “Safety Net”. People that have tests regularly or see the doctor often may see that their medical costs are high. The safety net marks the threshold of how much money is allotted, once that is meant a person is eligible to receive additional Medicare benefits in addition to the original Medicare benefit. This insures that medical costs and fees will remain low for the remainder of the current calendar year in which the person was eligible for the additional Medicare benefit (humanservices.gov.au). There are typically five different methods of funding healthcare systems, taxation, social health insurance, voluntary or private health insurance, out-of-pocket payments and donations to medical charities. Medicare is funded mostly through tax revenue and in 2011 the Australian government funded 69.1% of all health expenditures. Private healthcare insurers accounted for 7.6% of total health expenditures. Australia offers incentives for people who join private healthcare insurance plans before the age of 31, one of these incentives is a substantially lower premium rate, regardless of previous medical history. People that delay joining a private insurance plan face a 2% increase in premiums per year they do not join. Currently, 47% of Australian citizens have private healthcare insurance and relatively large amount of those citizens are above the age of 31. But this number dramatically decreases around the average time of retirement (Healy, Dugdale 12-13). Since Australia’s government does not directly provide healthcare through services, several committees are formed to help regulate the nation’s healthcare system. There are two key components to the success of this healthcare system which are the Department of Health and the Australian commission on Safety and Quality of Healthcare. The Australian commission on Safety and Quality of Healthcare is directly associated with ensuring positive care in hospitals, clinics and out-patient programs.
Healthcare in the United States Currently, the United States government has a very limited role in the healthcare system. There are some public medical service programs such as Medicare and Medicaid but the United States population primarily relies on outside private insurance companies for healthcare. These private insurance companies are not highly regulated and they are essentially the determining factor of what goes into their benefit packages. There are not many methods of controlling the rising cost of private insurance. Most private insurance companies are forced to ask healthcare providers to cover the costs or increase patient premiums. In 2011, 50 million people in this nation were uninsured and 30 million were described as underinsured. Healthcare services in America are highly inaccessible, health service providers seek out the patients with higher paying insurers (Kane 2012). This current system contains two publicly funded healthcare programs, Medicare and Medicaid, “public spending accounted for 48% of total healthcare spending (The Commonwealth Fund 129)”. Medicare is funded through payroll taxes, premiums and some federal revenues. Medicaid is a joint federal- state health insurance program, funded by taxes and regulated independently by each state (The Commonwealth Fund). Neither of these programs provide enough service for the average citizen, for example, citizens can be insured by public and private health insurance. Medigap provides a good illustration of what this program looks like, medigap is a private insurance policy that covers additional costs and services not included by Medicaid. These situations are not surprising when you look at how private insurance accounted for 33.8% of total healthcare spending (The Commonwealth Fund). The United States’ healthcare system is mostly regulated by select committees, government agencies and interest groups. There are about five primary groups that assume responsibility of regulation and governance which include The National Institute of Health (NIH), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), The Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the American Medical Association (AMA) (The Commonwealth Fund 129). Considering the infrastructure and trending view points, the United States’ future in healthcare looks very optimistic. The signing of the Affordable Care Act has brought on a new wave of healthcare reform in America and most of these new policies will be implemented the beginning of the new year, 2014. These policies include expanding Medicaid to everyone, establishing state-based insurance marketplaces for the individual and small business, provide insurance subsidies for low income individuals and tax incentives for small businesses. Other policies that are going to be a little harder to implement are eliminating copays for preventive services, forcing individuals to have insurance or face paying a fee, creating a savings program for Medicare, and expanding federal funding to include qualified health centers who provide services to low income individuals (The Commonwealth Fund 134). This would be the most influential and radical healthcare reform America has ever seen. These goals are far from reach but it would definitely be a step in the positive direction that this country needs to follow. Although it may seem that Australia’s healthcare system is superior to that of the United States, it is illogical not to consider all the variables that go into a healthcare system. Comparing the United States to Australia there are three major differences that are automatically identifiable which include the difference in overall land area, the tremendous difference in population and finally the most dramatic difference of all would be total government spending for a year. Size of the country pertains to the accessibility of healthcare, production of goods and services, and the overall infrastructure of a nation. America’s population is more than 10x the amount of Australia’s. This is a crucial component to understanding the current obstacles facing the United States which generally include some form of increase in production well still attempting to maintain quality. The most dramatic fact by far is government spending annually, last year the United States spent a total of 16.724 trillion and of that total, 899 billion dollars were spent on healthcare. Australia last year spent a total of 998.265 billion and from that total, they spent 120.1 billion on healthcare (OECD 2013). Even with this giant gap in spending, Australia is still finding a way to make their healthcare system more productive and efficient. All of these variables must be accounted when considering the effectiveness of both these healthcare systems because most of these factors directly correlate to their current status and situation (Edwards 2012). Geographical and demographical data can tell a lot about a country and its overall most distinguishable features but looking a little deeper into statistical data can reveal quite a lot. For example, America at one point in history produced the most doctors per 1000 people but that has significantly decreased. The United States only produces 2.5 doctors per 1000 people as compared to Australia’s rate of 3.3 doctors per 1000 people (OECD Health Statistics 2013). Another shocking fact is that the United States might spend the most of all the industrial countries on healthcare but they still have a considerably low life expectancy which is 78.7 as opposed to Australia’s life expectancy which is 82.1 (OECD Health Statistics 2013). But not all statistics have been painting a bad picture of the U.S. healthcare system, for example, of all the nations included in the OECD, the United States ranked first for the shortest wait times. The average insured citizen in the United States sees a specialist within 4 weeks and waits no longer than 4 months for elective surgery (Kane 2012). Overall the United States has a lot of revisions that need to happen in order to keep them on track with other progressive nations.
The United States is seen as having this superior healthcare strategy compared to the rest of the world and in reality that is not the case. The United States spends a substantial amount more on healthcare than the rest of the world and this supposedly makes them the leading healthcare system. But this ideology is widely debatable when you consider the profits that these private insurance companies earn. In a smaller picture, the United States has higher hospital spending and with higher spending people would assume hospitals are delivering more services but in reality U.S. hospital services cost more (Kane
2012). Places all around the world have found a way to cover the cost of basic medical necessities such as Australia, France, Japan, and much of the OECD. Universal healthcare is very possible to achieve in the United States but there are many concerns regarding reduction in quality, reduction in productivity, and some lawmakers don’t believe the U.S. budget can carry the financial burden of universal healthcare. Closing government loopholes and cutting administrative costs are essential to the success of establishing a new universal healthcare system.
of the cost, annually, Australia spends 8.9% GDP on healthcare (OECD, 2013). The benefits to having a healthy nation are limitless and it is essential for countries to establish a universal form of healthcare. With the world’s ever-growing population, and the emergence into the age of globalization and technology it is crucial to sustain the medical needs of a nation. As most of the world continues to move forward with progressive healthcare reform it is important for the U.S. not to fall behind its peers.
Healthcare in Australia Currently, Australia’s government does not directly provide healthcare to the public but rather funds the national healthcare scheme.
Now a government agent, Medicare, is funded by the government and handles public hospitals, pharmaceuticals, and population health programs. Medicare is able to regulate private healthcare insurance, pharmaceuticals and medical services. Australia’s universal healthcare system, Medicare, provides coverage to all citizens from the time they’re born to the time they die and they also provide coverage for permanent residence. Australia uses a fee schedule to determine the amount of medical services each person is offered under the standard Medicare benefit. This insures that doctors, hospitals, and medical services are paid similar rates for every patient they evaluate (Kane 2012). Although every citizen has access to universal healthcare services, there are people that chose to go through private health insurance which allows patients access to private hospitals and other patient services. Private health insurance plays a symbiotic role in the Australian government due to the regulations set in place such as how people are encouraged through tax penalties for high-income earners and tax rebates for low income earners (Healy, Dugdale …show more content…
11). Medicare has relatively effective troubleshooting program for certain citizens that might need a little more medical attention than others. In order to keep medical fees low, Medicare has established what is known as a “Safety Net”. People that have tests regularly or see the doctor often may see that their medical costs are high. The safety net marks the threshold of how much money is allotted, once that is meant a person is eligible to receive additional Medicare benefits in addition to the original Medicare benefit. This insures that medical costs and fees will remain low for the remainder of the current calendar year in which the person was eligible for the additional Medicare benefit (humanservices.gov.au). There are typically five different methods of funding healthcare systems, taxation, social health insurance, voluntary or private health insurance, out-of-pocket payments and donations to medical charities. Medicare is funded mostly through tax revenue and in 2011 the Australian government funded 69.1% of all health expenditures. Private healthcare insurers accounted for 7.6% of total health expenditures. Australia offers incentives for people who join private healthcare insurance plans before the age of 31, one of these incentives is a substantially lower premium rate, regardless of previous medical history. People that delay joining a private insurance plan face a 2% increase in premiums per year they do not join. Currently, 47% of Australian citizens have private healthcare insurance and relatively large amount of those citizens are above the age of 31. But this number dramatically decreases around the average time of retirement (Healy, Dugdale 12-13). Since Australia’s government does not directly provide healthcare through services, several committees are formed to help regulate the nation’s healthcare system. There are two key components to the success of this healthcare system which are the Department of Health and the Australian commission on Safety and Quality of Healthcare. The Australian commission on Safety and Quality of Healthcare is directly associated with ensuring positive care in hospitals, clinics and out-patient programs.
Healthcare in the United States Currently, the United States government has a very limited role in the healthcare system. There are some public medical service programs such as Medicare and Medicaid but the United States population primarily relies on outside private insurance companies for healthcare. These private insurance companies are not highly regulated and they are essentially the determining factor of what goes into their benefit packages. There are not many methods of controlling the rising cost of private insurance. Most private insurance companies are forced to ask healthcare providers to cover the costs or increase patient premiums. In 2011, 50 million people in this nation were uninsured and 30 million were described as underinsured. Healthcare services in America are highly inaccessible, health service providers seek out the patients with higher paying insurers (Kane 2012). This current system contains two publicly funded healthcare programs, Medicare and Medicaid, “public spending accounted for 48% of total healthcare spending (The Commonwealth Fund 129)”. Medicare is funded through payroll taxes, premiums and some federal revenues. Medicaid is a joint federal- state health insurance program, funded by taxes and regulated independently by each state (The Commonwealth Fund). Neither of these programs provide enough service for the average citizen, for example, citizens can be insured by public and private health insurance. Medigap provides a good illustration of what this program looks like, medigap is a private insurance policy that covers additional costs and services not included by Medicaid. These situations are not surprising when you look at how private insurance accounted for 33.8% of total healthcare spending (The Commonwealth Fund). The United States’ healthcare system is mostly regulated by select committees, government agencies and interest groups. There are about five primary groups that assume responsibility of regulation and governance which include The National Institute of Health (NIH), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), The Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the American Medical Association (AMA) (The Commonwealth Fund 129). Considering the infrastructure and trending view points, the United States’ future in healthcare looks very optimistic. The signing of the Affordable Care Act has brought on a new wave of healthcare reform in America and most of these new policies will be implemented the beginning of the new year, 2014. These policies include expanding Medicaid to everyone, establishing state-based insurance marketplaces for the individual and small business, provide insurance subsidies for low income individuals and tax incentives for small businesses. Other policies that are going to be a little harder to implement are eliminating copays for preventive services, forcing individuals to have insurance or face paying a fee, creating a savings program for Medicare, and expanding federal funding to include qualified health centers who provide services to low income individuals (The Commonwealth Fund 134). This would be the most influential and radical healthcare reform America has ever seen. These goals are far from reach but it would definitely be a step in the positive direction that this country needs to follow. Although it may seem that Australia’s healthcare system is superior to that of the United States, it is illogical not to consider all the variables that go into a healthcare system. Comparing the United States to Australia there are three major differences that are automatically identifiable which include the difference in overall land area, the tremendous difference in population and finally the most dramatic difference of all would be total government spending for a year. Size of the country pertains to the accessibility of healthcare, production of goods and services, and the overall infrastructure of a nation. America’s population is more than 10x the amount of Australia’s. This is a crucial component to understanding the current obstacles facing the United States which generally include some form of increase in production well still attempting to maintain quality. The most dramatic fact by far is government spending annually, last year the United States spent a total of 16.724 trillion and of that total, 899 billion dollars were spent on healthcare. Australia last year spent a total of 998.265 billion and from that total, they spent 120.1 billion on healthcare (OECD 2013). Even with this giant gap in spending, Australia is still finding a way to make their healthcare system more productive and efficient. All of these variables must be accounted when considering the effectiveness of both these healthcare systems because most of these factors directly correlate to their current status and situation (Edwards 2012). Geographical and demographical data can tell a lot about a country and its overall most distinguishable features but looking a little deeper into statistical data can reveal quite a lot. For example, America at one point in history produced the most doctors per 1000 people but that has significantly decreased. The United States only produces 2.5 doctors per 1000 people as compared to Australia’s rate of 3.3 doctors per 1000 people (OECD Health Statistics 2013). Another shocking fact is that the United States might spend the most of all the industrial countries on healthcare but they still have a considerably low life expectancy which is 78.7 as opposed to Australia’s life expectancy which is 82.1 (OECD Health Statistics 2013). But not all statistics have been painting a bad picture of the U.S. healthcare system, for example, of all the nations included in the OECD, the United States ranked first for the shortest wait times. The average insured citizen in the United States sees a specialist within 4 weeks and waits no longer than 4 months for elective surgery (Kane 2012). Overall the United States has a lot of revisions that need to happen in order to keep them on track with other progressive nations.
The United States is seen as having this superior healthcare strategy compared to the rest of the world and in reality that is not the case. The United States spends a substantial amount more on healthcare than the rest of the world and this supposedly makes them the leading healthcare system. But this ideology is widely debatable when you consider the profits that these private insurance companies earn. In a smaller picture, the United States has higher hospital spending and with higher spending people would assume hospitals are delivering more services but in reality U.S. hospital services cost more (Kane
2012). Places all around the world have found a way to cover the cost of basic medical necessities such as Australia, France, Japan, and much of the OECD. Universal healthcare is very possible to achieve in the United States but there are many concerns regarding reduction in quality, reduction in productivity, and some lawmakers don’t believe the U.S. budget can carry the financial burden of universal healthcare. Closing government loopholes and cutting administrative costs are essential to the success of establishing a new universal healthcare system.