Hi All,
Here is another essay I wrote on health services. I am lack of health terms and is not really satisfied with my output. There might also be too many words (319). Anyway, I would post it here and wait for any comments. Thank you!!
Every country should have a free health service, even if this means that the latest medical treatments may not be available through this service because they are too expensive.
To what extend do you agree with this statement?
Health service fee is consistently a huge concern for the citizens in various countries. One of the suggested solutions to this issue refers to the provisions of free-of-charge healthcare service, despite in the expense of most advanced technologies on medical catering close to the exceptional cost. Personally, I somewhat disagree with this approach based on the significant advantages brought by innovations in medications and maintain an acceptable level of service quality. 71
The principal argument against health services at no cost is to enjoy the benefits provided by the newest medical treatments. Apparently, numerous kind of illnesses and diseases claimed to be incurable in the past could be tackled by recent medicines and antidotes. Taking smallpox as an example, it is nearly a hundred percent assured that the patients would pass away in the ultimate stage. Fortunately, since the twentieth centuries the doctors produce some effective medications to change their fate. 79
Another major argument to keep the service fee is that it would led to an drastic increase of workload for health service providers, which in turn deteriorates the service quality in a significant sense. Expecting the doctors and nurse to appropriately handle the skyrocketing increased cases with limited resource might be realistic. 52
On the other hand, some may argued that for those who are either in poverty or financially disadvantaged, the government is responsible to take care of their needs in order to relieve their finance burdens. It could be a alive-or-dead situation for them when they suffer serious illness and in moral sense they should have the right to be treated without consideration on relatively unaffordable service. 66
Both sides have their merits and demerits. In my opinion, advancing medications and agreeable quality of health services outweigh ethical reasons on patient treatments. Perhaps the government could assist or aid these poor people by funds or issue some coupons on a regular basis to leverage the disadvantaged group of citizens. 51
Here is another essay I wrote on health services. I am lack of health terms and is not really satisfied with my output. There might also be too many words (319). Anyway, I would post it here and wait for any comments. Thank you!!
Every country should have a free health service, even if this means that the latest medical treatments may not be available through this service because they are too expensive.
To what extend do you agree with this statement?
Health service fee is consistently a huge concern for the citizens in various countries. One of the suggested solutions to this issue refers to the provisions of free-of-charge healthcare service, despite in the expense of most advanced technologies on medical catering close to the exceptional cost. Personally, I somewhat disagree with this approach based on the significant advantages brought by innovations in medications and maintain an acceptable level of service quality. 71
The principal argument against health services at no cost is to enjoy the benefits provided by the newest medical treatments. Apparently, numerous kind of illnesses and diseases claimed to be incurable in the past could be tackled by recent medicines and antidotes. Taking smallpox as an example, it is nearly a hundred percent assured that the patients would pass away in the ultimate stage. Fortunately, since the twentieth centuries the doctors produce some effective medications to change their fate. 79
Another major argument to keep the service fee is that it would led to an drastic increase of workload for health service providers, which in turn deteriorates the service quality in a significant sense. Expecting the doctors and nurse to appropriately handle the skyrocketing increased cases with limited resource might be realistic. 52
On the other hand, some may argued that for those who are either in poverty or financially disadvantaged, the government is responsible to take care of their needs in order to relieve their finance burdens. It could be a alive-or-dead situation for them when they suffer serious illness and in moral sense they should have the right to be treated without consideration on relatively unaffordable service. 66
Both sides have their merits and demerits. In my opinion, advancing medications and agreeable quality of health services outweigh ethical reasons on patient treatments. Perhaps the government could assist or aid these poor people by funds or issue some coupons on a regular basis to leverage the disadvantaged group of citizens. 51
