Cancer is described as the abnormal rate of cell growth (metastasis). There are various types of malignant growth depending on the occurrence in the body and also the type of cells affected. It practically targets the whole body including the blood (leukemia). There is improvement in terms of treatment and diagnosis in the eve of modern times but this has not translated to drop in mortality rates since once one is diagnosed as having cancer that means almost death (Alan & Lawrence, 1999). Early detection of cancer is necessary so as to stop the cancer in its onset. The occurrence rate of cancer is rather high for it is the second only to heart related diseases for causing death. Comparison between the deaths caused by cancer in the 1950’s and today, it has decreased slightly accounting for 553,888 deaths as compared to 1950’s. It’s projected that 1.5 million will be established to have cancer and this if not arrested early enough will translate into deaths. Prostate and breast cancers are the most common followed closely by lung cancers. Further estimates are that more than 5 million people living today in the US are living with cancer. Sixty three percent of 65 years and above have had cancer. Once someone has had a tumor, the chance of multiple recurrences is very high (Philip, 2004).
The Model according to Beveridge is a system of the governance financed through taxation (named after his name). The government acts as the central funds collector and distributor. What happens is that the government is the caretaker of contributions made by the citizens. It’s then deposited in the treasury or a welfare scheme that covers every citizen of that country. This model has its origin in Britain but several modifications have been done to fit other countries’ particular needs. The contributions are mainly for the civil servants who are employed by the government. In the sectors which are private, they have personal schemes that are more elaborate but work on a similar principle. There is considerable progress in the American health system but still above 45 million US citizens are not beneath the cover of the Health scheme. The government needs to improve on tax collection since it’s not clear if taxing every individual in a country or the formation of insurance for all, works best for the disadvantaged or poor (Alan, & Lawrence, 1999).
Health care expenses are getting out of hand for American citizens running to as high as four times higher than the raising in wages despite the universal belief that healthcare should be affordable to all. This cannot be realized especially because the basal tax for every body is still in effect. As a whole there is a decline in the number of small enterprises that offer insurance or health cover to its employees because of the enormous hurdles the small business must overcome. Going by the current trends about 14.5 million US citizens get insurance privately from the market which shows the problem with the market like lack of how to improve individual markets, lumping the population in terms of risk and condition of their health. Reforms in the health division are extremely needed both in the public along with private domains. There are avenues to improve in public domain for in its design, it leaves room for improvisation and improvement (Philip, 2004).
The crisis in the health sector needs radical surgery which is actually strengthening of the existing structures instead of scraping it. We can start with key areas that are priority in effecting those changes which are making the coverage to be cheap for all by insurance sponsored by the employer. The costs are kept from escalating out of the reach of the individuals by structuring tax credits not to exceed a limit that is fixed. A second key area is that the coverage should be cost effective for all even uninsured populations. Emphasis should be put on precautionary actions than curative measures. This will go a great deal on letting individuals take personalized interest in their health hence reduced national health bill. The other area is prioritizing vital investments so that citizens will not end up paying for shortfalls of the system because at the end is the taxpayer that is on the receiving end.
It’s easier to enact policies that control financing and health coverage than the cost and value of health insurance. This is pertinent for enlarging and upgrading the health system. The design for a revitalized health care is expected to consider the purposes for its creation. Some key points are that it should be safe, effective in its delivery, patient oriented, applicable in all situations and times, efficient in resource management and conservation and not discriminative (Alan, & Lawrence, 1999).
Countries that adhere to this model (The Beveridge Model) or a modified version of it, have seen the need to compensate the individuals behind the driving of the economy through creation of a levy kit that employers can contribute to either willingly or coercion by the government. This money forms a kind of insurance or welfare for the general populace. The kitty has enormous uses apart from funding the health system. Some of the funds are channeled to innovative research which seeks to find cure for certain diseases and answer some general causes of diseases plaguing the human kind. Cancer has been a major beneficiary of such funded research since it has been noted as an all time high death rate disease. Studies undertaken and are still going on for precautionary and healing on ways of stopping cancer. The researches done on cancer from public coffers are beneficial to the citizens of a country indirectly because it reduces the costs of diagnosis, the cost of drugs as opposed to when the researches have been done by private institutions (Philip, 2004).
These researches have effectively reduced the overall cost or expenditure in medical expenses regarding cancer treatment. Although a lot is still to be done towards eradication of cancer in the society, there is a collective responsibility from all the citizens towards the research that uses public funds contributed to the health scheme. Although some improvement needs to be done on this model for better performance, it has fared well by providing a flat platform for citizens in the health system.
References
Alan, K. & Lawrence K. (1999). The High-pressure U.S. Labor Market. New York: Princeton University press.
Philip, M. (2004). Health economics development, Washington: World Bank publications.