Greatest historical, political, and economic forces that shaped the development of the U.S. healthcare

What do you think were the greatest historical, political, and economic forces that shaped the development of the U.S. healthcare delivery system and why?

What are the positive and negative aspects of how the U.S. healthcare system developed?

 

 

Sample Solution

The United States healthcare delivery system has been heavily impacted by both historical and economic forces over the years. Three of the most significant are: World War II, Medicare and Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

World War II was a major factor which led to growth within the U.S. healthcare system as it resulted in an increased need for quality medical services due to its high demands on military personnel(Youn et al., 2018). This provided an opportunity for providers to strengthen their capacity while also focusing on improving research initiatives which could help provide better care during wartime conditions. Additionally, Congress passed legislation such as Social Security Act (1935) and National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & ; Laughlin Steel Corporation (1937) which laid down the foundations for modern day health insurance coverage – furthering growth in this sector.

In 1965 President Lyndon Johnson signed into law two bills known collectively as “Medicare & ; Medicaid.” These programs were designed to help meet the needs of seniors, individuals with disabilities, and low–income households by providing access to affordable health services while also reimbursing providers based on a fee-for-service model (Hudson et al., 2017). The establishment of these laws had an immense impact on how medical care was delivered in America – creating a more equitable system that focused on preventive care strategies rather than treatment alone. Finally, one of President Obama’s signature accomplishments was passing The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Of 2010 or ACA. This bill expanded access to even more individuals through provisions such as subsidies or Medicaid expansion while also introducing new regulations around areas like pre–existing conditions or essential benefits packages (Fisher et al., 2020 ). By doing so it helped create a more equitable playing field when it came too receiving quality healthcare regardless of socio–economic status.

In conclusion, three key historical, political, and economic factors that reshaped U.S. healthcare delivery systems are World War II, Medicare & ; Medicaid, as well as The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Of 2010 . Each one of these events brought about changes aimed at enhancing access to or improving quality of medical services available while helping make sure everyone had equal opportunities when seeking out treatments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. The Industrial Revolution: This period saw the development of new technology, which enabled advances in medical care, making treatments and cures more readily available to a larger segment of society. This led to an increased demand for medical services from the public, resulting in improved access to healthcare.

2. Technological Advancements: From the invention of X-ray machines to CT scans, MRI scanners and other modern diagnostic tools, technological advancements have been key in transforming U.S. healthcare delivery system into one that is patient-centered and evidence based as well as cost effective.

3. Government Intervention: Various laws passed by Congress such as Medicaid and Medicare have supported the development of an accessible healthcare safety net for all Americans regardless of their ability to pay or employment status. Additionally, laws such as the Affordable Care Act aimed at increasing affordability while improving quality of care have also helped shape our current system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conservative Alliance. On October 29, 2015, Stephanie Schriock of The Slope, guarantees the Casual get-together has proactively been “fixing the legislative guide with safe conservative regions,” getting seats they typically wouldn’t get an opportunity at winning. This pattern could extend across ideological group limits as “floor crossing” and between party alliances shaped to create specific political race results.

At last, the drawn out ramifications of applying Brazilian appointive approaches to the US could demonstrate deplorable. With a generally debilitating party framework, the possibilities of agreement and pay off will rise dramatically. Moreover, as the US keeps on encountering a shrinking working class, there would be cause for more prominent social uprisings. Adding into the class structure evaluation, “class structures have become undeniably more spellbound in cutting edge entrepreneur nations,” (Bastos, 153), and with implausible portrayal all in all, the polarization would keep on deteriorating.

Presently the issue with this speculative situation is only that, it is theoretical. The different ramifications that have been expressed lead one down an elusive slant that breeds negativity and dismisses the chance of a positive result. To the extent that any political specialist can perceive, a corresponding framework might just be the response to fix the US polarization, taking into consideration better portrayal of regions, for example, the “neglected” moderate Rust Belt, the frank liberal West Coast, and the blended moderate/moderate East Coast. Thus, while dissecting what is happening, for example, this, it critical to observe that there basically isn’t sufficient proof to help which type of a majority rules system will be more useful than another. There are many variables that become possibly the most important factor including society, ongoing political and social history, and eagerness to change to give some examples. In help, that’s what niel Franzese considers “an absence of definitive examinations with discoveries subverting the open essential framework is reason to the point of allowing the proposed new framework an opportunity,” (Franzese, 274).

While we might in all likelihood can’t be sure whether open-list relative portrayal would be helpful for the US world of politics, what we in all actuality do know is clear. Right now, the open-list PR is creating some issues inside Brazil’s administration and is bringing about friendly exhibits against the public authority. This has been more than featured by the reprimand of their leader Dilma Rousseff, whose political circumstance likewise reveals insight into what president-elect Trump might look soon. Furthermore, socio-political turm

This question has been answered.

Get Answer