As healthcare costs continue to soar, debates rage on about whether governments should provide free public healthcare or whether individuals should bear the responsibility for their own health. Public healthcare ensures affordable treatment and medicines for the people. Access to healthcare has been listed as a fundamental right in the constitutions of several countries and remains a core indicator in determining a country’s overall development and progress. Hence, through this essay, I aim to argue that providing subsidized and accessible healthcare is the duty of all governments, and cooperation between public and private healthcare ensures a healthy dynamic is maintained.
The major concern faced due to the privatization of healthcare is the markup on prices of essential medicines and treatment. Lack of competition and protective legislation entice private players to pursue excessive charging. This can be seen in the difference in prices of government-regulated and privately made insulin in several countries. Despite following the same standards and production process the privately made insulin was marked at a higher price. This has caused people to argue that life-saving treatments and medication shouldn’t be put behind a paywall. Furthermore, a private medical industry necessitates strong medical insurance. This awards the power of arbitration to insurance agents who remain unaware of the person’s condition and suffering.
However, supporters of the private medical industry argue that the public shouldn’t be made responsible for someone’s illness. The government shouldn’t have to pay tax dollars for a person’s bad lifestyle. Furthermore, they argue that privatization leads to better treatment and care. Due to higher pay, doctors and healthcare professionals are incentivized to provide better treatment. A public hospital may, however, not offer responsible or personalized treatment. In addition to this, privatization protects key research. Private companies invest millions of dollars in revolutionary drugs and treatment methods. These take years of time and effort, and a serious economic contribution from investors. They expect to be paid back for their efforts by selling effective treatment at a price they dictate. A government-controlled price would reduce incentives to pursue this groundbreaking research into new medical technologies and drugs.
In conclusion, I feel the advantages of government medical aid outweigh the disadvantages. People must have access to affordable treatment and medication, but also the ability to choose for themselves if they want public or private healthcare. I feel that we must supplement the private industry by introducing government hospitals and clinics. Competition would force private players to reevaluate their prices. Furthermore, the government must readily invest in private as well as public research to ensure the development of critical medical equipment and medication. Hence, both public and private medical industries should work together to provide better healthcare.