SEQS on Chapter 3 Managing Health care


Q1 This question is on Singapore’s management of health care

“Singapore’s healthcare policies benefited the people.” Do you agree? Explain your answer.

In my own opinion, I agree to a large extent as people generally receives affordable healthcare and the cost is well managed by the govt and the people.
I agree that there are benefits as the people are self-reliant, which is very important as it ensures that the people and the govt can manage the costs of health care in the long run. This is achieved through implementing Medisave and Medishield, where people regularly contribute to these 2 schemes which will help them in their payment of medical bills. In other words, they are practicing self-responsibility. The govt will intervene when people cannot pay despite having these 2 schemes, through means-testing, where the right amount of subsidies is given to the right person and through Medifund, which are contributed by the govt to help those who cannot afford their bills by helping them pay the balance. Hence, the govt will not be burdened with a high cost like Britain.
Our life expectancy rates are among the highest in the world, which is partly due to the people’s efforts in having a healthy lifestyle in order to lower the cost of medical care. This will also be due to increased govt efforts in promoting a healthy lifestyles.
But, however, it must also be noted that medical costs have risen and there are still some people who cannot afford the cost of health care. More ’C’ class wards have to be provided so that the poor can be provided with medical services.
However, I think that it is more of a benefit as the policies benefited the majority, esp. with the concept of self-reliance, which cannot be seen in other countries. People will take responsibility of their health together with the govt and they will put in effort to stay healthy in order to avoid paying for medical treatment












Q2 This question is on Britain’s management of health care

“The welfare state was a success”. Do you agree? Explain your answer.

I disagree as I think that it is more of a failure when it is considered in the long term
It is successful in the short term, when it just started after WW2. It was popular with the people and long queues were seen everyday. People’s support for the govt increased and they recovered very quickly from the devastation brought by the war, physically and mentally. More importantly, it catered also to the poverty, which stands a majority because of the war , by providing free services.
As time goes by, problems soon occurred. Low efficiency were seen, directly from the long queues, and the facilities could not cope with the rising demand. Govt spending increased because of the higher demand and it soon became a burden to the govt. More seriously, people had dependence on the govt instead of being self-reliant before the war, which meant that subsidizes could not be lifted as it will cause social unrest and the govt will lose support.
Hence, it is a failure more of a success, Due to the abuse by the people, problems cropped out and the usefulness became limited. Originally the aims of a Welfare State was to help the people but in the long run it harmed the people; the govt increased spending whilst the people became dependent on the state. Hence, the govt shifted away from this welfare system in 1979.

& 6:10 AM