With my second topic comes a lot of confusion. Health care is not a simple topic that can be understood easily. Even if you ask most adults I'm sure many of them are not entirely comprehensive of the many intricate details that comes with this topic. I am in no way close to understanding this complexity and know it will be a long time until I finally do, but with a little help I can begin to grasp the broad understandings of what it entails. This video by Kahn Academy helps give a better representation of "ObamaCare," also known as, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This video covers the four sub topics of Health Care which helps break down what the policy is and how you can benefit, or not, by it. The first of the four sub topics, is individual mandate, which talks about how you either have to get the health insurance or pay a tax. Those who aren't paying insurance at the moment and are receiving care at the emergency room are adding to the bill of those who are already paying insurance because they have to be treated. When the mandatory tax becomes issued out, those who don't have health care and will choose not to receive it, will be paying the tax which, essentially, is supposed to compromise for the health care they are already receiving. The second sub topic includes pre- existing conditions. In this category insurers will charge someone who is healthy and someone who is not, located in the same place, the same price. Thirdly, the insurance exchanges category will potentially make clear the type of insurance that one is advertising and the policies within it for the purchasing customer. Lastly, the final sub topic includes subsidies. This will increase medical costs for those with larger incomes to make those with lower incomes able to afford this health care plan. This video is a broad overview of the very complex health care act that helps one who is blurred on this topic, including me, understand the basic background of it.
< PPACA or "Obamacare": Basic overview of what is sometimes referred to as "Obamacare"
Now, looking through this topic with a sociological lens we can see where problems can occur. For starters one of the many debated parts of the policy lays in the first sub topic, which is if people should be forced to receive health care. Should people be required to pay and be given health care? Does this go against individual rights? If America is about equality and giving equal rights, then I agree that everyone should be given equal health care. But it's not easy to distribute something as costly as that, the manor in which such a thing is prosecuted is not simple. In the pre-existing conditions sub topic it can be looked at as something similar to a flat tax. Someone who is sick and someone who is healthy can, essentially, pay the same health insurance without the cost increasing for someone who is ill. With equal pay, both can benefit. A person with an illness will not have to pay increased medical revenues and can pay the same as someone who is healthy. This goes along the lines of natural rights and the idea that everyone should be treated equally under the law. Why should someone receiving health care be given a higher price because they had or have the misfortune of experiencing an illness, and how will this increased cost for health care benefit them? Another controversy that is debated is held in the final sub topic. Should those who can well afford medical care have to pay extra for those who can't? Many would state that they work hard for their money and shouldn't have to be taxed more just because they make more. To many it does not necessarily seem fair, and it almost leads into what we have discussed in class regarding the idea of sharing the cost. In this case we would be socializing health care. Do we help pay for the well being of others? As a mostly capitalistic country a shift in this nature would lead to mixed opinions and views. We also have the concept that well it's my money, I worked hard for it, I want to spend it on my me and my family and I don't want my money paying for someone else when it could have been spent on other things that would have benefitted my family and I. Should the well being of a community override the individual? Should the individual pay in regard to the idea that the fortunate should help the unfortunate? Or should the rights of an individual decide where their money is going when paying for a policy? The difficult development of this act can, in a way, be noticed as a shift in form of government, which leave many unhappy of where the structures of the American society is going. As one can clearly see, this policy has the goal of goodness for all, but the implementing of it can be difficult, intricate, and quite controversial.
No comments:
Post a Comment