Dear Mr. Holmes,As you know, before 3 days, you have answer two questions and they was discussion questions which my professor posted them on the blackboard for students to answer them. And you have answered the two questions for me “Thank you” and this was the first part of this assignment. Now, my professor wants us ” the student” to read the answer for all student and replay to at least 3 of my classmates. So, now I need you to read the answers of the three student that I have picked them for you to replay to them.NOTE:1- I am attaching the answers that you did 3 days ago ” in case if you don not have them”2- I am attaching the answers of four students, Two answers for question #1 and the other two answers are for question #2. I need you to replay to each of them and the responses must be 200 words for each responses.
Here bellow, I am giving you an example for an answer for one of the classmates AND the replay from another student to his answerTHE STUDENT ANSWER WAS ON THE QUESTION #1. And here is the answer:COLLAPSE

As 2013 is almost over, 2020 is a lot closer than we think. I would love to be optimistic and express great confidence in health care reform, however based on the current health care system, I believe that we will not see many changes for at least a couple of decades. In “Sick Around the World”, a PBS documentary that compares 5 other countries with more nationalized healthcare than our own, it shows that some of these countries still have to deal with new problems such as the earning power of physicians being reduced and issues of access. The United States healthcare system is more of a business and is complex because there are many stakeholders and the pharmaceutical industry and biotechnology industries are so big. Stakeholders such as policy makers, universities, physicians and insurance companies and even universities control the landscape of healthcare in the United States. For decades physicians organized under the AMA (American Medical Association) rejected the idea of universal health care because they believed that it would challenge their professional dominance in medicine and place restrictions on how they practice. The nature of healthcare in this country has been dominated by profit and personal interest not improvingpublic health.

Given the attitudes and current issues I believe that there will be some gains in the healthcare landscape but a lot of work will still need to be done with regards to cost and access. I believe that it will be easier to gain care; waits will not be as long however rural and underserved areas will still have a problem with access. I think that physician assistants and nurse practitioners will aid the physicians in delivery of healthcare. I think that higher quality care will be provided generally and for the first few years of this reform the healthcare expenditure of the GDP will increase but eventually reduce and stabilize. I believe that healthcare jobs (and IT) will also see an increase especially with the elderly population however the earning potential for doctors and other medical personnel could possibly decrease. Also I believe that medical personnel will become more highly educated and trained to deal with an aging and diverse population.

NOW, here is the replay to this answer from another student:

Elise,

I think it is interesting that you brought up the idea of shopping around. At the end of the day health insurance is a business and although most Americans will be insured there will still be different levels of health insurance to choose from. The act says that the Exchanges will offer a silver plan, gold plan, platinum plan and a catastrophic plan. I’m sure the plans with higher premiums will offer better coverage and be accepted by more doctors. In turn those who can not afford those higher plans will be forced into the lower premium plans and may have to see doctors that are overwhelmed with patients just as the like the doctors now who accept medicaid and medical assistance. And they may not be able so receive the same treatments or prescriptions that would be covered by better insurance plans.

My son and I both had medical assistance when I was a full time student and not working. It was a terrible experience. The doctors were nice but they were overwhelmed by the amount of patients they had. Trying to get an appointment, a prescription or a medical form filled out would take weeks and sometimes you don’t have weeks. There was a time when my son needed his asthma prescription and I could not reach the doctor and I just kept getting bounced from voicemail to voicemail. Finally I just had to take him to and urgent care center and the cost was much higher. Also I suffer from migraines and the medication I took when I was covered under my parents insurance was not covered by medical assistance. I was forced to take a generic form of another drug that did not really work for me because I could not afford the out of pocket cost which was around $360 for 6 pills.

My point is there will be more people insured under this act but this caste system of coverage will still exist. The poor will never get the same medical treatment as the rich unless there is an act that covers everyone the same way. Until then there will still be overworked doctors, lack of proper treatment and packed emergency rooms in certain areas.

Mr. Holmis, I hope this example can help you to understand what I neet from you.