Introduction Health care delivery has become big business throughout the world. America is without doubt the leading country of medical and scientific advances. However, this paper will examine the similarities and differences between two impressive health care models. The high cost of providing health care coverage has become a challenge for many countries including modern industrialized nations like the United States and Australia (The Commonwealth Fund, 2010).
This research will examine this phenomenon and the governments of the United States and Australia’s attempts to control costs through legislation. The United States and Australia share some similarities but one considerable contrast: Both countries have reacted in many ways to utilize legislation as a means of controlling escalating costs. Nationalized Models and Country Comparison Australia:
Today, Australia has a universal national health care program called Medicare that was re-instituted in 1984. The government does recommend that those citizens who earn over a specific income to obtain a private health insurance. Unlike the United States which has a system of market justice, Australia has a system of social justice that believes everyone should have basic health care (Australia Government Foreign Affairs and Trade).
Unfortunately, there is growing concern for the aboriginal population of Australia and them relieving basic health care because of their rural location on the land to support them. Note, this is the same ideas that helped put together the culture of early Americans. the problem with the Aboriginals is that they are a dying culture, like the American Indian culture; both countries are losing their continents first citizens (Australia Government Foreign Affairs and Trade). Much like the United
States, Australia has also attempted to utilize their legislation to lower the costs. Though Australia has a universal system, the legislation is more about encouragement for self-insuring to reduce government money and reducing governmental costs. Programs such as Quarantine Act 1908, World Health Organization Act 1947, Health Insurance Act 1973, Medical Indemnity Act 2002 and Cancer Australia Act 2006 are all programs Australia has enforced in order to lower the cost of health care. America:
Currently, the United States is known worldwide for its technological breakthroughs, diagnostic excellence, compared to the middle nineteenth century of medicine in the United States (Shi & Singh, 2013). Medical costs have continued to steeply rise year after year, for several decades. In 2010 alone, the cost of health care delivery in the Unites States topped $2. 7 trillion, this was almost 17 per-cent of the Gross National Product (GDP) )The Commonwealth Fund, 2010) however costs are expected to climb as high as 20 per-cent of the GDP by 2020 (Shi & Singh, 2013).
In this case acts such as Patient protection and Affordable care Act (PPACA), reforms some procedures of health insurance providers, Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, expands access to 30 million Americans, is in addition to PPACA Patient Safety and quality Improvement Act (2005), and Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (1986) are examples of the major works created by the government of the United States in an effort to improve access to citizens, increase of technology utilization in hopes of reducing long term costs However, some efforts have been successful, nearly all have cost more than expected.
America vs. Australia Clearly, health care costs are going to continue to rise. This examination seems to indicate that the world has not found a health care system that can deliver access, process, and outcomes at a level that the population has grown accustomed to and would feel comfortable with and not experience increases in cost. The issue is, how much money are citizens of any country willing or able to pay for health care? Australia chose to return to a national universal health care program in 1984 to provide health insurance for all.
However, the cost to Australia is indicated above is 9. 1 per-cent of their GDP while in comparison with the United States who spent nearly17 per-cent of their GDP in 2010 and are expected to approach 20 per-cent by 2020 (Australia Government Foreign Affairs and Trade). Clearly, the population of the United States and Australia differ, as well as demographics, and the amount of research and development that occur in the United States but the magnitude of costs cannot be ignored.
Still, even with universal coverage deducted from tax levy, the government of Australia suggests that those above a specific guideline obtain additional coverage. Pharmaceutical coverage in both countries is an expensive proposition that the United States had added to Medicare in the form of part D but the program had cost more than previously contemplated, expanded in size as new medications came to market and consumers demanded them (Australia Government Foreign Affairs and Trade). Conclusion
These two countries are in a reform in order to make their health care systems become a success. The United States and Australia share some similarities but one considerable contrast: Australia has had a universal national health care system since 1984. Australia also had a period of privatization of their healthcare system however; the country chose to go back to a national health care system. This will provides a comparison to health care and outcomes from different types of health care systems.
References Australia Government Foreign Affairs and Trade. Retrieved at :http://www. dfat. gov. au/facts/healthcare. html. Shi, L. & Singh, D. (2013). Essentials of u. s healthcare systems. (3th ed. ) Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett. The Commonwealth Fund. (2010, June). International profiles of health care systems. Retrieved from http://www. commonwealthfund. org /~/media/Files/Publications /Fund%20Report/2010/Jun/1417_Squires_Intl_Profiles_622. pdf.