Policy History: Provide some background on the health issue you are researching. What
aspects of earlier debates (key arguments, rhetoric, etc.) have shaped current
controversies on this topic?
The United States currently has many healthcare issues that it is facing. These issues
are the main reason why a large number of people in the country face a lot of health
problems. The country is currently spending the largest amount of money on healthcare
compared to other countries. Due to this reason, many people have provided proposals for
policies that can be utilized to solve these health issues and help individuals in the country
attain a healthcare improvement. An example of the many issues that the country is facing
among others includes shortage of doctors, substance abuse, tobacco, overweight, and
obesity. Access to healthcare is a major issue that many individuals in the United States feel
the need to ensure its existence.
Many people in the United States are interested in the issue of access to healthcare.
Without good access, people do not have the ability to ensure that they will remain healthy.
Access to health care is thus a significantly important aspect that people are highly concerned
with. The patient protection and the affordable care act is one of the main policy that has
attempted to address this issue. Through this act, many individuals have managed to attain
access to healthcare. A large number of individuals who were initially uninsured have
currently managed to attain access to healthcare provision. This is due to the fact that the
affordable care act has made access to health care significantly cheap and thus those without
the ability to pay high for them to access healthcare provision have managed to attain cheap
options that they can take and thus attain access. The government, through the act, has also
established programs that both cater for the poor, the old and the disabled individuals
ensuring that they are fully covered for health under the government?s cost (Sederstrom,
Despite these changes and governmental efforts to ensure access to healthcare for all
individuals within the united states, Healthcare access is still a significant problem in the
united states. There are still a number of people who do not have access and at the same time,
a large number of people still question the efficiency of the policy. With the changes that the
care provision act introduced by president Obama established, many people attained access to
healthcare provision, an aspect that resulted in a high demand for highly qualified health care
providers like doctors and physicians. The doctors in the country are thus not sufficient and
thus access to health care for many people in the country resulted in many people within the
country receiving poor quality healthcare provision. The main issue in this case, therefore, is
the fact that the access to healthcare is not completely inclusive despite the establishment of
the affordable care act and has many other methods through which people and policy makers
explain would be beneficial in increasing access. A good example of such a policy argument
is changing the scope of practice laws, which limit the ability of healthcare practitioners to
provide care to the limit of their abilities.
Two Sides: What are the two opposing positions in the contemporary debate and who
are the key proponents of each? Describe what each side proposes is the problem and
how they intend to solve it, then relate what you know about who the claims-makers are
(the advocates of each side) and what stake they have in the outcomes.
The argument concerning the issue of changing practice laws has both supporters to
this claim and the individuals who do not support the claim. People who support the claim
explain that healthcare providing practitioners have significantly important and beneficial
skills that they can utilize to fully help individuals overcome their health challenges. The
ability of these individuals to utilize their skills in the same is however limited by many
practice laws, which state that they can only provide certain services and despite their high
training and ability, these individuals are denied the chance to continue with their practice.
This aspect takes place when the country is currently in a large shortage of healthcare highly
qualified practitioners like doctors and thus many individuals are forced to wait for a long
time to receive the services of the only qualified and permitted practitioners when the freely
available practitioners like nurses could have effectively addressed their requirements and
health needs. This side of the argument, therefore, explain that it is highly appropriate for the
laws that limit the ability of the individuals within the health providing facilities to be
changed so that they can allow all practitioners to provide services to the levels of their
training limit. This would significantly increase the number of individuals within an
organization who can help patients and thus access to many individuals would be enabled
(Wood, 2011).
There are however a group of individuals who are significantly against this policy
argument. These individuals explain that the current laws that govern practices have been
established for many reasons, which involves the provision of quality care to every patient.
They explain that the changing of these laws would increase both access and inefficiency in
the field of health care and that it would be appropriate for people to wait until their cases are
handled by highly qualified individuals than to have their cases addressed first by people who
are not considered qualified. Instead of this solution, therefore, these individuals propose that
the most appropriate solution is the increase of medical training facilities and encouragement
of the young individuals in the high learning institutions to take courses that relate to health
care provision careers. This reason, therefore, is a major cause of the opposing views of the
individuals providing significant explanations concerning this issue, and the most appropriate
steps that should be taken to fully address it.
In what ways do these policy positions reflect an individual vs a social factors model of
disease or approach to health care? Is there a moral dimension to the debate?
The two arguments concerning access to healthcare have support from people in the
United States. A large number of them support the argument that changing laws for practice
within the United States would address the access problem in the United States. Another
group of individuals on the other hand supports the claim that changing the laws would
significantly diminish quality provision of healthcare and thus they support the policy of
increasing the number of institutions offering healthcare provision courses to students in the
higher learning institutions of the country and at the same time the provision of
encouragement strategies where those students would be encouraged to study those courses.
These policy positions reflect people?s social perspectives and individual
personalities. A group of people exists who mainly view the negative possibilities of aspects
in the United States. These people in many cases oppose the majority of the issues that do not
affect them, whether they are correct or wrong. The majority of such individuals are in the
group that is currently claiming that lowering the restrictions established by the practice laws
would reduce the efficiency of healthcare provision. This is because many of the individuals
who involve in the provision of healthcare activities do not fully utilize the skills that they
had been taught in their training sessions. The majority of these skills are out into waste,
mainly because the practice restricting laws mainly prohibit the from using them on patients.
The united states, therefore, face challenges and remain without addressing them, when these
challenges have a solution that could simply be established by changing some of its current
operating law (States in Action, 2010).
A major problem exists within the country due to the people who offer support to
others and policies without any specific reason for the support. This group of people decides
to offer support to policies through political; basis and not their views and perspectives
concerning the same. These individuals would support a policy argument without even
having to listen and understand the claims of the argument, simply because a certain
individual who they support politically is also supporting the argument. With regard to this
policy, a number of individuals also support the policy arguments basing from the individuals
that support them. The debate also has a moral dimension. The individuals who support
arguments since they believe they are the most appropriate and should be established are
morally right and should have their understanding taken into account when the appropriate
approach concerning the policy is being taken. The individuals who offer the support of an
argument without considering its provision, on the other hand, are not morally correct,
mainly because they offer support to an argument they have not considered and thus are not
aware of the effect that the policy established by the argument would have both to them and
How do social conditions play a role in understanding these policy positions? Is there an
issue with access to appropriate resources, and, if so, what would they be in this
particular case? Are there ?upstream? factors that divide the positions, or are they
ignored by both sides? If the latter, give an example of what is missing from the debate.
Social conditions refer to the situations through which individuals have in the society
due to their ethnicity, income, education and occupation among other factors. These
conditions significantly affect the perspectives of individuals and their concerns with regard
to many policies that are proposed. An individual with a significantly low income, for
example, would have a significant concern to policy arguments that would make a difference
with his or her affordability of certain goods or services and at the same time improve his or
her income. At the same time, an individual with a high income would have a different
perspective, mainly because he or she is aware that making certain goods and services cheap
would not make any significant difference.
Access to healthcare is a condition that all people in the society can attain. Both the
rich and the poor people in the society are affected by the condition. The poor people in the
society lack the ability to access healthcare because they rely fully on the single option that
they can afford within the affordable care act provision. These individuals do not have the
ability look for other sources of care provision mainly because they are not able to pay for
them. Some other individuals at the same time do not have any way through which they can
access healthcare. The lack of healthcare providers causes a high demand for healthcare
provision and thus results in an increase in healthcare provision cost. The increase in cost
results in a certain group of low-income earners being unable to attain access to healthcare
Although the problem of access also affects the high-income earners, these
individuals have the ability to outsource healthcare services from other options apart from the
provisions of the affordable care act. This implies that the problem of access does not affect
them significantly in the same way that it affects the low-income earners. The ability of the
high-income earners to access healthcare services from other places mainly because they
have the ability to pay for them and the inability of the poor individuals to access such care
thus affects the views and perspective of people with regard to this policy proposition. People
with the ability to outsource healthcare services have their main aim being the quality of care
that is provided to them. Due to this reason, therefore, they support the solution of increasing
medical courses in schools and encouraging students in order to increase the number of
qualified healthcare providing personnel in future. They have the understanding that
currently, they would still attain access from different sources since they have the ability to
pay for them. Low-income earners, on the other hand, have a different perspective (Enomoto,
Are there disparities among different social groups in regards to this issue (e.g.,
different disease rates, differential access to treatments or facilities, different
experiences of disease progression, etc.)? Do these disparities figure into the current
debate? If not, why not?
As explained, major disparities exist within the existing social groups. The main
social groups are divided by the difference in earning that people in the society attain. The
individuals who attain high earnings have the ability to guarantee their access to health care
unlike the individuals living under low earnings. This fact causes their opinions and support
concerning the healthcare access policy arguments significantly different. The lowly earning
individuals support the argument that practice laws that limit highly skilled healthcare
providing individuals like nurses to provide health care to patients up to the level of their
limits to be changed allowing them to provide more of the skills that they have attained. On
the other hand, the highly earning individuals support the establishment of the policy
argument that the most appropriate solution to access of healthcare is increasing the number
of higher learning institutions that offer healthcare provision courses. The argument also
includes the increase in the number of individuals willing to take those courses and thus
manage to increase the number of qualified healthcare providing individuals in future.
The lowly earning individuals support this argument of the policy because the cost is
a major concern in their access to healthcare. They are not able to access healthcare from
other sources apart from the provision of the affordable care act that they manage to afford.
When the healthcare providing individuals are thus limited and they are required to wait for a
long time for them to be provided with healthcare, these individuals do not have the funds to
pay for other outsourced sources of care. The individuals, therefore, views the change of laws
to allow the other restricted but skilled practitioners to also contribute by offering their skills
to the maximum levels. The individuals understand that by changing these laws, many
individuals would thus involve in the practice of providing care and thus the problem of
delays to access healthcare, which is significantly important, would be reduced significantly.
The rich individuals, on the other hand, support the argument of increasing the
number of qualified practitioners in the healthcare provision system through the increase of
courses in schools and encouragement strategies because, to begin with, quality is a major
concern compared to the individuals who are not able to access healthcare similarly. The
second main reason is because the individuals have the ability to use other methods in
accessing healthcare apart from the provided options by the healthcare affordable care act,
mainly because they have the ability to pay for the services offered. This implies that the
individuals, therefore, do not have problems waiting for years until the individuals from
schools complete their studies to cause the desired changes. These two main disparities,
therefore, makes a significant contribution to the debate concerning this policy.
Annotated Bibliography
The research concerning this issue is obtained from many literal sources, which
provide sufficient information concerning the topic. This section provides information
concerning each source and the reason why it was beneficial to the research of the topic.
States in Action, (2010). State and Federal Efforts to Enhance Access to Basic Health Care:
States in Action Archive. Retrieved from http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/
This source provides information concerning the current methods that different states
in the country are utilizing to increase healthcare and the challenges that these methods face.
Information from this source is important because it explains the current problems that the
states are facing with regard to access to healthcare and the current methods that the states are
attempting to utilize in order to change the condition. Access to healthcare is important and
thus almost all states have established plans to enhance the same. Some of these plans have
failed and others have succeeded. Information from this source can thus be utilized to
determine whether the arguments of the access policy are appropriate or not.
Sederstrom, J. (2014). 7 ways to improve access: Modern Medicine Network. Retrieved from
This article provides information concerning the methods that different states have
decided to establish through which they intend to increase healthcare access to the individuals
within them. The authors explain certain methods and proposals to policy makers through
which healthcare access can be improved and enhanced within the states and even the nation
at large. Amount the many methods that the authors explain is the method of changing
restriction laws which is explained in detail within this paper. The authors also provide an
explanation of the many individuals that intend to have the other policies that are education
based replacing this policy.
Enomoto, K. (2016). Improving Access to Mental Health Services: HHS Gov. Retrieved from
This source provide information concerning the ability of different but already
established programs in the united states have managed to affect the ability of the united
states to increase and improve healthcare access. The author to the source explain about a
large number of programs that are currently in place, which aid the ability of the country and
individual states to extend healthcare access to the individuals that are not able to attain
access. The information provided by this source is important because through it the paper
manages to explain the basis that different groups supporting different arguments base their
Wood, R. (2011). Reducing Costs and Improving the Quality of Health Care: Robert Wood
Foundation. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2iEuPLL
This source provides information concerning the means through which the quality of
healthcare can be improved with reduced costs being also in place. The author to the source
provides many ways through which people are able to increase the number of sources and at
the same time manage to reduce the cost. The source explains the aspect of ensuring that all
practitioners are allowed to operate to the levels only limited by their skills and thus supports
one of the argument claims that the change of the restriction laws is one of the main methods
through which access to healthcare provision can be enhanced.
Enomoto, K. (2016). Improving Access to Mental Health Services: HHS Gov. Retrieved from
Sederstrom, J. (2014). 7 ways to improve access: Modern Medicine Network. Retrieved from

States in Action, (2010). State and Federal Efforts to Enhance Access to Basic Health Care:
States in Action Archive. Retrieved from http://www.commonwealthfund.org/
Wood, R. (2011). Reducing Costs and Improving the Quality of Health Care: Robert Wood
Foundation. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2iEuPLL

"Are you looking for this answer? We can Help click Order Now"