"Public Support for National Health Insurance: the Role of Attitudes and Beliefs" is a decent example of a paper on the health system. Health insurance is a fundamental concept in the United States because it lacks a perfect health insurance policy. This has led to diverse opinions from the citizenry. The diversity in attitudes and beliefs that relate to health makes reforms fundamental. There have been several attempts to design a universal health insurance system. However, these attempts have been largely unsuccessful. According to reports from the past 20 years, Americans favor the ratification of decent national health insurance (Bundorf & Fuschs, 2007). Examples of barriers to the implementation of a perfect health insurance system in the United States are numerous.
This includes the presence of public groups that oppose the ideologies. These groups are powerful, and their opinions are influential. An additional reason that contributes to the absence of a health insurance system in the United States is the historical events that inspired the creation of the current system. Americans who seem to support national coverage also oppose interventions from the government that could transform the health policies (Bundorf & Fuschs, 2007). Attitudes of the American public towards the role of government affect their support for national health insurance.
Interventions from governments should work with health markets in determining health insurance. Certain beliefs relate to the widespread support for national health insurance (Bundorf & Fuschs, 2007). Several measures contribute to the diverse attitudes concerning the role of the administration. Economic intervention and the need for government to redistribute further explain these measures. These include questions that focused on the impact of the system on poor people.
Additionally, measures that address the beliefs included extremely profitable enterprises, insensitive politicians, racial bigotry, and the significance of religion also come to play (Bundorf & Fuschs, 2007). Support for national health insurance seems to be increasing. Most Americans strongly favor rational health insurance. They also indicated that the insurance system should be practical regardless of the outcome, for example, increasing taxes. People’ s attitudes were extremely diverse especially on the role of government intervention. Those who had favorable attitudes towards redistribution equally favored the national health insurance. There was also a significant correlation between attitudes and government roles.
Individual attitudes uniquely influenced support for health insurance (Bundorf & Fuschs, 2007). The effect of attitudes that encouraged the government to intervene was minimal compared to the support for an increment in the minimum wage rate. Several features that characterize fundamental institutions within the US seem to favor health insurance. For example, enterprises usually design inauspicious insurance products for the US market (Bundorf & Fuschs, 2007). Negative views against the private sector suggest that there is a significant difference in the views of Americans regarding health insurance.
The views highlight that people are motivated to acquire health insurance upon comparison to the views regarding politicians. People who did not support the health insurance also believed that they had the ultimate control over their lives (Bundorf & Fuschs, 2007). Other Americans display individualistic attitudes towards health insurance. This explains why perfect national health insurance lacks. The issue of religion is irrelevant in such cases because spirituality has a minimal correlation with health insurance. The opposition of special interest groups could reduce the negative aspects that surround the enactment of health insurance systems. Discussion Questions What is the role of a citizen when designing health policy? What are the roles of special interest groups when formulating policy?
ReferencesBundorf, K. & Fuschs, S. (2007). Public Support for National Health Insurance: The Roles of Attitudes and Beliefs, Forum for Health Economics & Policy, 10, 1, 1-33