Universal Health Care System

At first glance, a universal health care system seems like an excellent idea. A nationalized healthcare system is a way to provide every citizen with free health care courtesy of the government; however, the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. The United States is moving towards establishing a full universal health care system with programs like Obamacare. America should stop this progression because the consequences of government funding, the decline in quality health care, and the resulting shortage of primary care physicians will be perilous. If the government is to provide free health service to every citizen, the funds need to come from somewhere. The majority of the funding would likely come from taxes. In the United Kingdom,

In fact, many Canadians often come to the United States and pay for private services rather than wait long periods of time in their public system (Messerli). American quality care could be compromised if citizens are put on waitlists like other countries with national coverage, instead of being treated promptly. In the NHS, “the average waiting time for elective hospital-based care is 46 days, although some patients wait over a year” (Light 27). In Canada, the waiting period is 9.8 weeks (Graham). Both of these periods are “longer than the [6.5 weeks] physicians consider to be [a] clinically ‘reasonable’ [wait]” (Graham). These long waiting periods occur because the government has a short supply of financial and human resources, so choices have to be made about who needs treatment the most. As a result, people endure extreme suffering and even death during their waits (Messerli). On the other hand, Americans are able to see a doctor almost instantaneously compared to other countries’ citizens. Fewer than ten percent of Americans wait more than two months to see a doctor; for countries with national coverage, this percentage falls in the thirty to forty range (“Right to Health Care ProCon.org”). Two months is a costly wait because conditions can worsen drastically in that amount of time. In today’s system, the government is not responsible for providing medical attention,

Yet, a universal health care program creates a shortage of physicians. In America’s system, doctors’ salaries depend upon the difficulty and demand of their specialties and patient satisfaction. Other systems “pay all subspecialists on the same salary scale” at a government-mandated rate (Light 29). The diversity of each medical specialty and the unique challenges each pertain is a factor that drives students to the medical field. If a neurosurgeon is paid the same as a family practitioner, less people are likely to undergo the difficulties of becoming a neurosurgeon. Also, there are no rewards for “doctors who attract scores of patients and do the best work” because they will be paid the same as the rest (Messerli). A government-mandated rate allows no room for raises based on good work and patient satisfaction. Along with being paid equally, medical specialists will also be paid less; “the average subspecialist in Canada earned 30% less [than a US subspecialist], and the average subspecialist in the United Kingdom earned 50% less” (“Right to Health Care ProCon.org”). Universal health care makes the government responsible for paying every doctor’s salary, so due to a lack of funding, doctors would be paid considerably less than they are now. The resulting shortage of physicians could be