Universal health care is often presented as an idealistic goal that remains out of reach for all but the richest nations. Thats not the case, writes Amartya Sen. Look at what has been achieved in Rwanda, Thailand and Bangladesh. <\/p>\n
An under-funded and overcrowded general hospital in Malaysia <\/p>\n
Twenty-five hundred years ago, the young Gautama Buddha left his princely home, in the foothills of the Himalayas, in a state of agitation and agony. What was he so distressed about? <\/p>\n
We learn from his biography that he was moved in particular by seeing the penalties of ill health by the sight of mortality (a dead body being taken to cremation), morbidity (a person severely afflicted by illness), and disability (a person reduced and ravaged by unaided old age). Health has been a primary concern of human beings throughout history. It should, therefore, come as no surprise that healthcare for all universal healthcare (UHC) has been a highly appealing social objective in most countries in the world, even in those that have not got very far in actually providing it. <\/p>\n
The usual reason given for not attempting to provide universal healthcare in a country is poverty. The United States, which can certainly afford to provide healthcare at quite a high level for all Americans, is exceptional in terms of the popularity of the view that any kind of public establishment of universal healthcare must somehow involve unacceptable intrusions into private life. There is considerable political complexity in the resistance to UHC in the US, often led by medical business and fed by ideologues who want the government to be out of our lives, and also in the systematic cultivation of a deep suspicion of any kind of national health service, as is standard in Europe (socialised medicine is now a term of horror in the US). <\/p>\n
One of the oddities in the contemporary world is our astonishing failure to make adequate use of policy lessons that can be drawn from the diversity of experiences that the heterogeneous world already provides. There is much evidence of the big contributions that UHC can make in advancing the lives of people, and also (and this is very important) in enhancing economic and social opportunities including facilitating the possibility of sustained economic growth (as has been firmly demonstrated in the experience of south-east Asian countries, such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and, more recently, China). <\/p>\n
Further, a number of poor countries have shown, through their pioneering public policies, that basic healthcare for all can be provided at a remarkably good level at very low cost if the society, including the political and intellectual leadership, can get its act together. There are many examples of such success across the world. None of these individual examples are flawless and each country can learn from the experiences of others. Nevertheless, the lessons that can be derived from these pioneering departures provide a solid basis for the presumption that, in general, the provision of universal healthcare is an achievable goal even in the poorer countries. An Uncertain Glory: India and its Contradictions, my book written jointly with Jean Drze, discusses how the countrys predominantly messy healthcare system can be vastly improved by learning lessons from high-performing nations abroad, and also from the contrasting performances of different states within India that have pursued different health policies. <\/p>\n
*** <\/p>\n
Over the last three decades various studies have investigated the experiences of countries where effective healthcare is provided at low cost to the bulk of the population. The places that first received detailed attention included China, Sri Lanka, Costa Rica, Cuba and the Indian state of Kerala. Since then examples of successful UHC or something close to that have expanded, and have been critically scrutinised by health experts and empirical economists. Good results of universal care without bankrupting the economy in fact quite the opposite can be seen in the experience of many other countries. This includes the remarkable achievements of Thailand, which has had for the last decade and a half a powerful political commitment to providing inexpensive, reliable healthcare for all. <\/p>\n
Thailands experience in universal healthcare is exemplary, both in advancing health achievements across the board and in reducing inequalities between classes and regions. Prior to the introduction of UHC in 2001, there was reasonably good insurance coverage for about a quarter of the population. This privileged group included well-placed government servants, who qualified for a civil service medical benefit scheme, and employees in the privately owned organised sector, which had a mandatory social security scheme from 1990 onwards, and received some government subsidy. In the 1990s some further schemes of government subsidy did emerge, however they proved woefully inadequate. The bulk of the population had to continue to rely largely on out-of-pocket payments for medical care. However, in 2001 the government introduced a 30 baht universal coverage programme that, for the first time, covered all the population, with a guarantee that a patient would not have to pay more than 30 baht (about 60p) per visit for medical care (there is exemption for all charges for the poorer sections about a quarter of the population). <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Originally posted here:<\/p>\n
Universal health care: the affordable dream<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Universal health care is often presented as an idealistic goal that remains out of reach for all but the richest nations. Thats not the case, writes Amartya Sen. Look at what has been achieved in Rwanda, Thailand and Bangladesh Continue reading