Policy goals and Objectives
There are several goals aimed at improving the quality of the healthcare system in the United States. One is safety. Mortality rates are still comparatively high in the country. Some deaths reported are due to carelessness of healthcare personnel. Two is timelessness. Healthcare in the country must be readily available at every minute. Unlike in other countries, there should not be any time when no health personnel are available. Three is effectiveness. The healthcare personnel like nurses, doctors and other health practitioners must be skilled and very experienced. Healthcare personnel who are not skilled enough will lead to premature deaths and other complications. The fourth goal is efficiency. Medical personnel must be efficient so that they become reliable. Otherwise they are untrustworthy with lives. Consequently, policy must aim at these four aspects of the healthcare system. This would greatly improve the quality of the system.
Policy Options and Alternatives
There are alternatives and options to healthcare improvement in the country. One, the government and the stakeholders can increase the funding to the healthcare system and two, increase research in the field of medicine. The first option will enable appropriate training of health practitioners and improve their morale since their pay will be much better while the second option will ensure that qualitative Medicare is available in the country. However, it is possible to do nothing and continue with the same strategy: Title VI of the Public Health Service Act.
Criterion 1: possibility of increase in funding
Pro
Increase in funding to the healthcare system would greatly improve the quality of healthcare system in the country. Lives would change and people would be healthier. Funds are the backbone of any sector. The healthcare sector is no different. The huge change that would come about with such a move is indescribable.
Con
More funding will mean more taxes to the general public. This may cause a rebellion among the citizenry. Since costs will rise, the changes in the healthcare system may not be accepted and in fact the health of the general public may resultantly go down.
Criterion 2: increase of research
Pro
Increase in research is likely to have a very huge effect in the field of medicine and the healthcare system. Better and less costly Medicare will be available. Two, there are likely to be alternatives to the complex situations facing the sector. There is no doubt that health researches need to be conducted more so as to find solutions to the many issues facing this system.
Criterion 3: Ability to Meet Current and Future changes
Pro
The changing needs of the healthcare system are in no doubt. People acquire more sicknesses which have not yet been researched and finding solutions becomes difficult. The policy adopted must therefore ensure that the probable future health needs of people are addressed appropriately. A good example is AIDS. In the period prior to the early eighties, nobody knew about the illness. However, when it became a pandemic, solutions needed to be found to combat it. Though there is still no cure, there is a possibility. When the cure is found, there is likely another sickness that will be discovered that will not have the cure. It was so since malaria, chicken pox and even small pox were discovered.
Therefore, if funding and research are both increased, the future demands are likely to be met. If the health system is improved, the future demand is likely to be addressed. Thus, the policy adopted will address this.
Con
Changing needs of a society are diverse and very complex. Forecasting them provides a great challenge. Therefore, money and time, which are very limited resources may be wasted but be unable to address the future health demands though the current one will be met.
Criterion 4: Political Feasibility
Pro
With increased demands in the healthcare system, inefficient and unskilled health workforce provides a great challenge to the stakeholders. That is why agencies, legislatures and institutions must be open to innovative solutions to meet the health needs of people. It is significant to educate legislative and regulatory bodies about matters of healthcare improvement
Con
Financial increment and research improvement to the healthcare system will most likely affect the financial system of the country. Though people will benefit, they will have to dig deeper into their pockets. Training of not only researchers, but also medical practitioners will also have to be improved. This will require more money. Therefore, the main issue will be funds and training.
Comparison of Alternatives and Results of Analysis
Analysis of scores between alternative 2 (the financing and Title VI combination for healthcare finance) and alternative 3 (research and development) reveals a tie. Alternative 3 nevertheless obtained weaker points on individual criteria. Alternative 2 is uncommon when using matrix of criteria and alternatives. Therefore the community must come together as whole if the healthcare system is to be changed. This will benefit everybody. Policy makers must examine the pros and cons of adopting each alternative and act accordingly.
References
Barry, R., Murcko, A., & Brubaker, C. (2002). The six sigma book for healthcare: Improving outcomes by reducing errors. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press.
Davidson, R. H. (2003). Workways of governance: Monitoring our government's health. Washington, D.C: Governance Institute.
Figueras, J., Robinson, R., & Jakubowski, E. (2005). Purchasing to improve health systems performance. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J., & Donaldson, M. S. (2000). To err is human: Building a safer health system. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
The Nursing clinics of North America. (1966). Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co.
