HCA 340 Discussion Board Assignment 1 Chapter 2 Benchmark De

Hca 340discussion Board Assignment 1chapter 2 Benchmark Developments

Answer the following questions:

1. The insurance industry plays a major role in the American health care system and absorbs a significant portion of the health care dollar. A single payer system, whether it is a private company or the US government, would eliminate the complex insurance paperwork burden and free substantial funds that could be diverted to support care for the under-served. In ACA debates, a “public option” was defeated by lobbyists. Identify some reasons why resistance to a single-payer concept, used in every other developed country, has continued in the U.S.
2. Almost every medical or technological advance seems to be accompanied by new and vexing ethical dilemmas. Yet, the United States has no structure in place to resolve such issues. Should the federal or state governments take responsibility for ethical decision-making and for protecting the public? If neither, what might be other options for providing ethical guidelines and oversight?
3. As strongly evidenced by the ACA and prior legislative attempts to address the problems of the health care system, these attempts are always met by shifting alliances among well financed and, often, self-serving lobbying groups. How, in the American system of politics, can health care get more objective support on behalf of consumers?
4. Every 10 years, the public health sector creates an elaborate set of targets for health status improvements in the United States. Healthy People 2010 failed to meet 85 percent of Healthy People 2000’s goals. Is there merit for establishing several hundred more objectives for Healthy People 2020, or are these simply academic exercises? What are your opinions about how to energize the “Healthy People” goals among providers and the American public?

Paper For Above instruction

The development and evolution of the U.S. healthcare system are complex, influenced by economic, political, ethical, and societal forces. Addressing issues such as the role of insurance companies, ethical dilemmas arising from medical advances, lobbying influences, and public health goals requires a nuanced understanding of systemic challenges and potential solutions. This paper explores these interconnected themes, offering insights into the barriers and opportunities for reform and improvement within the American healthcare landscape.

Resistance to a Single-Payer System in the United States

The United States' reluctance to adopt a single-payer healthcare system, despite its success in other developed nations, stems from various entrenched interests and historical factors. One primary reason is the powerful influence of the insurance industry, which benefits from the current multi-payer model. Insurance companies exert significant lobbying efforts to preserve their market share and profit margins, which results in resistance to reforms that could threaten their profitability (Marmor, 2000). Additionally, concerns about government expansion and increased taxation contribute to political opposition, especially among fiscally conservative groups that prioritize limited government intervention (Schoen et al., 2010).

Moreover, cultural values emphasizing individualism and free-market principles underpin resistance to a government-led single-payer system. Many Americans associate healthcare with personal responsibility and fear potential government overreach, leading to skepticism about universal coverage models (Geyman, 2008). The historical context of healthcare reform initiatives, often portrayed as threats to existing economic interests, further complicates efforts to move towards a single-payer model. Even though other wealthy nations operate successfully with such systems, political and economic vested interests in the U.S. have maintained the status quo.

Ethical Decision-Making in Medical Innovation

Technological and medical advances continuously present new ethical challenges, from gene editing to end-of-life care. Currently, the U.S. lacks a centralized, national framework dedicated solely to resolving such dilemmas, leaving responsibility to a fragmented array of professional societies, institutional review boards, and individual clinicians. This decentralized approach raises concerns about consistency, public transparency, and accountability.

The question arises whether federal or state governments should assume responsibility for ethical oversight. Proponents argue that a federal agency, such as the Department of Health and Human Services, could develop comprehensive guidelines ensuring uniformity and safeguarding public interests (Caplan, 2019). Others suggest that ethical decision-making should remain within professional institutions, augmented by independent bioethics commissions that include diverse stakeholders, including patients, clinicians, and ethicists. This hybrid model could facilitate flexible, context-specific, yet consistent ethical standards.

Alternative options include establishing national bioethics councils or independent oversight bodies that collaborate across jurisdictions to provide guidance, monitor ethical issues, and advise policymakers. Given the rapid pace of technological change, proactive ethical frameworks are necessary to prevent misuse and protect societal values (Jonsen & Siegler, 2018). Thus, a coordinated, transparent approach—combining government oversight with professional and public input—may be the most effective solution.

Shaping Objective Support for Healthcare Reform

The influence of well-funded lobbying groups in American healthcare often skews policy debates, favoring self-interest over consumer protection. To foster more objective support, reforms should increase transparency regarding lobbying activities and campaign contributions, enabling voters and policymakers to scrutinize influence peddling (Epstein & Marmor, 2008). Strengthening the role of independent research institutions and think tanks—free from industry funding—can produce unbiased evidence to inform policy decisions.

Additionally, fostering greater public involvement in healthcare policymaking through participatory forums or citizen advisory panels can shift advocacy balance toward consumer interests. Implementing policies such as public campaign financing could reduce reliance on corporate donations, promoting more equitable representation of consumer concerns (McChesney, 2013). Healthcare reform efforts must also ensure that policymakers are held accountable for pursuing decisions aligned with public health priorities, rather than the narrow interests of powerful lobbying groups.

Transparency, independent evidence, and inclusive participation are crucial to evolving a more objective, consumer-centered healthcare policy landscape in the U.S.

Reevaluating and Energizing Healthy People Initiatives

The Healthy People initiative, designed to set measurable health goals, suffers from unrealistic expectations and inadequate progress, as evidenced by the unfinished targets of Healthy People 2010. Proposing hundreds of objectives may risk diluting focus, creating "academic exercises" without tangible impact (National Research Council, 2012). Instead, prioritization—selecting high-impact, achievable goals—could improve accountability and motivate stakeholders.

To energize these goals among providers and the public, strategies should include aligning incentives with health outcomes, increasing community engagement, and integrating health literacy programs. Providers can be motivated through performance-based incentives tied to prevention and wellness outcomes. Public awareness campaigns emphasizing the personal and societal benefits of healthy behaviors can foster a culture of proactive health maintenance. Partnerships with schools, workplaces, and local organizations are essential for translating national objectives into community-level action.

Sustained leadership, clear communication, and incentivization are vital to transforming ambitious health goals into achievable, motivating benchmarks that foster tangible improvements in population health.

References

• Caplan, A. (2019). Ethical Challenges in the Age of Medical Technology. Oxford University Press.
• Epstein, D., & Marmor, T. (2008). The Politics of Health Care Reform. University of Michigan Press.
• Geyman, J. P. (2008). The Healthcare Mess: How We Are Billions of Dollars in Debt and Still Not Covered. Praeger.
• Jonsen, A. R., & Siegler, M. (2018). Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. McGraw-Hill Education.
• McChesney, R. W. (2013). Digital Disconnect: How Capitalism is Turning the Internet Against Democracy. The New Press.
• Marmor, T. (2000). The Politics of Medical Care: The History and Future of American Health Policy. Pragmatic Press.
• National Research Council. (2012). Improving Health in the Community: Improving the Effectiveness of the Healthy People Initiative. National Academies Press.
• Schoen, C., et al. (2010). How Many Are Insured? Trends Among U.S. adults from 2000 to 2008. Health Affairs, 29(1), 92–99.
• Geyman, J. P. (2008). The Healthcare Mess. Praeger.
• Schoen, C., et al. (2010). Trust in the Health Care System. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 35(1), 114-135.