Public vs Private health care

[If I remember correctly, this one was about the pros and cons of private and public health care. Disclaimer: I might be wrong on some points regarding other countries’ health care system, as I wrote this not so seriously. Feel free to send me correction though !]

In some countries like England or France, health care is provided both by the government and by private companies. However, it is important to question the positive and negative points of health care being taken in charge by a private organisation.

It is essential to note first that as the private sector isn’t funded by the government, it has no limited budget, and thus can provide better medical infrastructures. Private facilities are usually in better conditions, cleaner and newer, and there can be more specialists available than in the public sector.

But private companies need to be expensive, so they can have the funds to provide a quality service. This means that not everybody can have access to health care : some people can’t afford a private medical appointment, and that is why public health care stays vital. We can demonstrate this point by mentioning the thousands of people who couldn’t afford a medical treatment in the United States before the Obamacare system (even though the act was repealed by D. Trump after his election). On the opposite of public health care, private companies are not paid for by the insurance ; it is not a universal service.

On the other hand, if fewer people have access to private health care, there will be less waiting time to get an appointment. The distribution of the services between the private and the public sectors could then be positive for the government, whose burden would be lighter.

In conclusion, I believe that private health care has both advantages and inconvenient, but that it should work hand in hand with the public system in order to be effective.

Leave a Comment

Votre adresse de messagerie ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *