Whether covering medical expenses should be the government’s responsibility has become a topic of significant debate since the number of ill people has risen sharply as a result of the latest pandemic. Some people argue for free healthcare, while others assume that providing fully-funded quality care is impossible and that physical wellbeing is not the critical priority now. This essay will discuss both viewpoints and offer a balanced approach for solving the problem.
First of all, providing free healthcare is vital for the elderly, terminally ill individuals, or those confined to bed. Due to medical incapacity, these people cannot cover the expenses by themselves. Moreover, if the ill person does not have relatives that help with payment, they risk getting into debt or even passing away before getting the care they are legally entitled to. For instance, my grandmother, who has been struggling with diabetes for several years, had no chance to purchase expensive medicine she was prescribed to by herself because of her low government pension.
On the other hand, offering a fully-funded care to everyone leads to tax increase that may face strong public opposition. Furthermore, in perspective it may cause the lack of income for military, schooling and other crucial economical sectors. In result, we are in danger of facing insufficient workforce, bad education and disintegration of the army. Moreover, making the medical services free lowers its quality.
From my point of view, the balanced approach can satisfy both sides of the argument. It entails in obligatory full-funded care only for those with chronic illness and senior citizens. On the same time, funding should not include medical expenses of capable individuals.
In conclusion, providing free healthcare have both benefits and drawbacks. While for some it is the matter of life, it can endanger country’s economy and lead to unsatisfying level of service. Finally, measured approach meets both personal wellbeing and economy concerns.