The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Or In Short

The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Or In Short Affordable

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or in short Affordable Care Act, changed the landscape of the health care industry. For this assignment, read the article “Information asymmetries and risk management in healthcare markets: The U.S. Affordable Care Act (ACA) in retrospect” by Mendoza, and respond to the following questions: Discuss the “moral theory” contained in this article. Explain whether you agree or disagree with the author that the ACA was an answer to health care accessibility. Explain whether you believe or do not believe that ACA will improve patient care. Discuss what you think President Biden should do with the ACA. Discuss what strategies you would recommend to deal with the economic realities of health care based on your own research. Lotven, A. (2021). Health care executives order kick-off ACA policy making spree. InsideHealthPolicy.Com’s Health Exchange Alert, 9 (5).

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The Affordable Care Act (ACA), enacted in 2010, has significantly reshaped the healthcare landscape in the United States by aiming to improve accessibility, quality, and affordability of healthcare. Central to the discussion surrounding the ACA are moral theories that justify or critique its implementation, debates on whether it genuinely enhances healthcare access, and predictions about its impact on patient care. Furthermore, the future of the ACA, especially under the Biden administration, and strategies to address economic challenges in healthcare are vital topics to explore. This paper critically examines these aspects through a comprehensive analysis informed by Mendoza’s insights and recent policy developments.

Moral Theory in Mendoza’s Analysis

Mendoza’s article incorporates a moral theory rooted in the principles of social justice and ethical distributive justice. The theory emphasizes that healthcare is a fundamental human right, and societal obligations should facilitate equitable access to medical services. Mendoza advocates that policy interventions, such as the ACA, are morally justified if they aim to reduce disparities and address information asymmetries that create market failures. The moral underpinnings align with the utilitarian perspective, seeking to maximize overall societal welfare by ensuring vulnerable populations gain better access to healthcare. Additionally, the article highlights the ethical importance of beneficence—promoting the well-being of individuals—and non-maleficence, by protecting against harm due to lack of coverage.

This moral approach underscores the ethical necessity of government intervention in health markets to correct market failures caused by information asymmetries and economic inequalities. Mendoza’s perspective suggests that health is a public good requiring moral responsibility from society and policymakers to ensure equitable distribution. This moral stance supports the ACA, viewing it not merely as a policy initiative but as a moral imperative to promote fairness, prevent exploitation, and uphold individuals’ rights to essential health services.

ACA as an Answer to Healthcare Accessibility

I agree with Mendoza’s assertion that the ACA was a significant step toward addressing healthcare accessibility. Prior to the ACA, millions of Americans lacked health insurance due to high costs, pre-existing condition exclusions, and administrative barriers. The ACA introduced Medicaid expansion, individual mandates, and marketplaces designed to lower costs and broaden coverage. These reforms increased insurance coverage substantially, reducing the uninsured rate from approximately 16% in 2010 to around 8% in recent years (Courtemanche et al., 2020).

While challenges remain—such as coverage gaps in states that declined Medicaid expansion—the ACA made healthcare more accessible for many segments of the population. It also mandated protections for pre-existing conditions, encouraging insurers to cover more individuals who previously faced exclusion. Therefore, from a policy perspective, the ACA demonstrated a moral commitment to narrowing health disparities and enhancing access.

However, critics argue that systemic issues, including high deductibles and provider shortages, limit the full realization of accessibility. Nevertheless, the ACA’s foundational goal aligned with the moral principle of equity in healthcare. Hence, I concur that the ACA contributed meaningfully to improving healthcare accessibility, although further reforms are necessary for comprehensive coverage.

Impact of the ACA on Patient Care

There is compelling evidence to suggest that the ACA has positively influenced patient care quality. By expanding insurance coverage, the ACA increased the utilization of preventive services—such as vaccinations, screenings, and wellness checks—thus facilitating early diagnosis and treatment. Studies show that increased coverage under the ACA correlates with improved health outcomes, including reductions in mortality rates for certain diseases (Sommers & Cohen, 2020).

Moreover, the emphasis on value-based care and accountable care organizations has transitioned healthcare from volume-based to quality-based metrics. These reforms incentivize providers to improve care coordination, reduce hospital readmissions, and focus on patient-centered outcomes. The ACA’s provisions for mental health and substance use disorder parity further enhanced holistic patient care.

However, some challenges persist, such as disparities in care quality across regions and socioeconomic groups. Nonetheless, the framework established by the ACA has laid the groundwork for continuing improvements in patient care quality through ongoing healthcare reforms and innovations.

The Future Role of the ACA under President Biden

President Biden’s administration has reaffirmed the importance of the ACA, proposing enhancements rather than complete overhaul. Biden’s policy agenda aims to expand Medicaid further in non-expansion states, increase subsidies to reduce insurance premiums, and strengthen health equity initiatives. Strategic adjustments include lowering administrative barriers and promoting public options that complement the ACA marketplaces.

Furthermore, Biden’s focus on addressing social determinants of health and tackling social inequities aligns with the ACA’s foundational goals of fairness and accessibility. The administration should prioritize stabilizing the ACA exchanges, ensuring affordability, and extending coverage for marginalized populations. Additionally, efforts to integrate healthcare with social services could improve population health outcomes, making the ACA a central tool for advancing health equity.

Nevertheless, future challenges include political opposition and the need for sustainable funding to support expansions. The Biden administration must navigate these obstacles with bipartisan support and innovative policy solutions to maximize the ACA’s benefits.

Strategies to Address Economic Realities in Healthcare

Addressing the economic challenges of healthcare requires multifaceted strategies. Based on recent research and policy analyses, the following approaches are critical:

1. Implementing Value-Based Payment Models: Shifting from fee-for-service to value-based payments encourages efficiency, quality, and cost containment (Bashshur et al., 2018). Incentivizing providers to focus on outcomes reduces unnecessary procedures and promotes cost-effective care.

2. Expanding the Use of Technology: Investing in health information technology, telemedicine, and electronic health records can reduce administrative costs, improve care coordination, and enhance access, especially in rural areas (Kvedar et al., 2020).

3. Promoting Price Transparency: Greater transparency in healthcare pricing empowers consumers and encourages competitive pricing among providers, reducing inflated costs (Dafny, 2018).

4. Addressing Social Determinants: Integrating healthcare with social services, housing, nutrition, and education can prevent costly health issues and improve overall population health (Marmot, 2017).

5. Increasing Focus on Primary Care: Strengthening primary care services reduces reliance on high-cost specialty and emergency care, leading to better health outcomes and reduced costs (Starfield et al., 2019).

6. Policy Reforms for Better Financing: Implementing progressive taxation or public funding mechanisms can ensure sustainable financing while maintaining access for vulnerable populations (Folland et al., 2019).

By adopting these strategies, policymakers can confront the economic realities of healthcare, promote efficiency, and ensure equitable access to quality care.

Conclusion

The ACA embodies a moral commitment to social justice, aiming to rectify market failures and promote equitable healthcare access. Mendoza’s analysis underscores the ethical motivations behind health policy reform, emphasizing the importance of fairness and beneficence. The ACA has considerably improved healthcare accessibility and patient outcomes, though challenges remain. Under President Biden, the trajectory involves expanding and strengthening the ACA to further reduce disparities and enhance quality. Addressing the economic realities of healthcare requires innovative, value-driven strategies focused on efficiency, transparency, and social determinants. Continued policy refinement and sustained political will are essential to realize the vision of a universal, equitable healthcare system in the United States.

References

  1. Bashshur, R. L., Shannon, G., Krupinski, E., & Grigsby, J. (2018). The Empirical Foundations of Telemedicine Interventions for Chronic Disease Management. Telemedicine and e-Health, 24(2), 86-107.
  2. Courtemanche, C. J., Marton, J., & Yelowitz, A. (2020). Medicaid expansion and the design of health insurance exchanges. Journal of Public Economics, 188, 104232.
  3. Dafny, L. (2018). How to think about health care prices. The New England Journal of Medicine, 378(6), 517-519.
  4. Folland, S., Goodman, A. C., & Stano, M. (2019). The Economics of Health and Health Care (8th ed.). Routledge.
  5. Kvedar, J. C., Fogel, A. L., & Feldman, S. (2020). Digital medicine's march on chronic disease. Nature Biotechnology, 38(12), 1500–1504.
  6. Marmot, M. (2017). Social determinants, health inequalities, and healthcare. The Lancet, 389(10077), 1331-1332.
  7. Starfield, B., Shi, L., & Macinko, J. (2019). The impact of primary care on health outcomes. The Journal of ambulatory care management, 42(2), 101-109.
  8. Sommers, B. D., & Cohen, R. A. (2020). The impact of the Affordable Care Act on health-related disparities. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 45(2), 183-202.
  9. Lotven, A. (2021). Health care executives order kick-off ACA policy making spree. InsideHealthPolicy.Com’s Health Exchange Alert, 9(5).

Related Assignments