Nowadays there is a debate among general public that government should finance in a healthcare and people have not to spent their money on this. I partially agree with the statement as it plays a crucial role in everyone’s lives, but can also have several negative points.
On the one hand, government fundings of medical services provide an access to important treatment, especially for vulnerable groups and population with low income. It promotes to increase life expectancy, allows early diagnosis of diseases and, of course, reduces mortality rates. Moreover, such system improves a total nations’ well-being, increases rates of life expectancy as well.
However, a full free system of healthcare can bring some drawbacks. Firstly, an excessive usage of medical services cause a significant damage to governments’ and tax payers’ budget. Secondly, limited resources and budget constraints often become a reason of long waiting times and decrease of a medical services quality. Furthermore, a missing of private sector might cause a shortage of concurrency and efficiency of overall system. From my point of view, the most radical method to this is balanced approach, basic medical services of which are provided by government ,and private sector offers extra possibilities. Such approach allows to manage resources effectively, and at the same time to keep a high level of medical service.
In conclusion, despite an importance of government fundings, a completely free system of healthcare is does not seem to be ideal, and a combination of governmental and private services are shown as more effective variants.