Universal Healthcare: A Comparison of Healthcare Systems in Australia and Brazil

This article discusses universal healthcare and compares the healthcare systems in Australia and Brazil. It covers the National Health Performance Framework, healthcare in Australia and Brazil, and the similarities and differences between the two systems.

Running Head: Universal Healthcare 1
Universal Healthcare
Name
University Affiliation

Running Head: Universal Healthcare 2
Introduction
Universal healthcare is defined as the situation where individuals from all over the world are in a
position to access healthcare without any hindrances. Hindrances in this situation include being
not able to access either financially or because of any other reasons. Universal healthcare
consists of the whole process of provision of quality healthcare services, promotion of health
services through prevention mechanisms, according to treatment to patients, rehabilitation of
patients and the inclusion of palliative care. It addresses the reason and causes that arise from the
diseases and why they cause suffering and death. The aim, therefore, is to make sure that those
who are affected get quality healthcare. It addresses the financial issue which is a significant
determinant to accessing healthcare (Hobdell, Petersen, Clarkson, & Johnson, 2013). People in
extreme poverty are hardly in the right positions to afford the care that they need. When faced
with illnesses they go to extremes of selling their assets, borrowing; which leaves them with
hardly any future, to pay for their healthcare.
Healthcare in Australia
Australia has the Medicare which is a scheme forged by the government to provide healthcare to
Australians. The system has been put in place to cater to the primary health care costs of
Australians. The government taxes employees at a rate of 1.5% of their basic salary which is then
invested in the primary healthcare scheme. The state of the Australian healthcare system is
among the best in the world and regarding performance and quality of patient improvement. The
system which is a welfare system meaning that the taxes are collected from citizens to cater to
the payment works. According to the universal healthcare where it requires that healthcare
should be affordable to all individuals, the Australian model has upheld those standards. Those
who cannot cater to their healthcare and are not in any form of employment can access public
healthcare facilities where they get treatment (Stephens, Porter, Nettleton, & Willis, 2016). The
Australian government has also invested in research and education of medical practitioners.
Doctors, nurses, midwives, and other staff have been provided with healthy, safe and
constructive working conditions with easy pay.
Healthcare in Brazil

Running Head: Universal Healthcare 3
The universality of health care was not a constitutional right until the year 1988. The constitution
made sure that every Brazilian had the right to access healthcare. The government was tasked
with the mandate to provide mechanisms to reduce illnesses and promote health and protection.
It meant that the social and economic development process of Brazil towards universal
healthcare was in motion. Brazil has two sections of health schemes that cater to them. The first
is the government-sponsored scheme which is paid by the taxes that is collected from Brazilians.
These services can be accessed in both public and private health facilities, but the system is
regulated and controlled by the government. The second is the access to health care through
individual funding. This scheme includes individuals who work in urban towns and can be able
to self-sponsor their healthcare. It is mostly used by those who are employed or self-employed
(Lu and Hsiao, 2013). There are insurance premiums that individuals apply for to cover them in
different health facilities. As much as this is expensive, some Brazilians seek these services due
to the quality of the public healthcare system. The public healthcare system majorly dominates
the poor regions of Brazil which include the Northeast area. It is also the most subscribed to the
system by the Brazilians. The classification of healthcare in Brazil is mostly like those of
developing countries. The financial structure is still not, and most public facilities need
improvement. Most of the health facilities are privately owned and financed, and they get their
income from patients who have private health care insurance premiums, or cash payments. Some
big investors have invested in a lot of insurance companies that offer these premiums. They have
occupied most of the Southeast are which consists of wealthier citizens.
Research has it that these companies generate about USD 50billion every year from these
premiums. Public healthcare facilities also administer care to those who have private insurance
premiums especially for expensive procedures that are not covered in the government scheme.
According to the universal healthcare coverage, Brazil has met standards in ensuring that
vaccinations are provided for every child, and there has also been the access to prenatal care for
all pregnant women. It has also guaranteed that most healthcare facilities and drugstores have
sufficient drugs that are of quality and are affordable to a big chunk of the population (Kwon,
2015). It has also achieved by ensuring that more medical practitioners have been added through
a comprehensive human resource expansion program in the Universal Health System. The
government has even drafted policies that are aimed to equip, train and attract medical and health
practitioners. It is essential to ensure that their working conditions, basic pay, and education are

Running Head: Universal Healthcare 4
catered for. The country has also invested in technology innovation especially in the
pharmaceutical area to make sure that drugs of quality and international standards are provided
to the citizens.
The National Health Performance Framework
The National Health Performance Framework of 2009 was brought to assess, analyze and
evaluate the health care of Australians. This framework is categorized under fourteen health
dimensions which are grouped in three major areas. These areas comprehensively cover health
status, determinants of health and finally health system performance. The health status addresses
four essential topics. The first is the health conditions which explain the attributes of the disease.
Whether the disease is prevalent or not, the disorder, bodily harm, trauma or any other issues that
are related to health. The second is the human function. It highlights whether the body has had
impairments or the features of the body have any limitations. The third is wellbeing of the
individual regarding the mental or social capacity. The fourth which is essential covers the
mortality rates and most importantly the life expectancy. The second grouping is the
determinants of health. It means the factors that are either influencing health positively or
negatively and how they should be addressed. The first under this the environmental factors
which include physical, chemical and biological factors. The second is the community and
socioeconomic factors. Community factors include social capital and access to support services
in local environs while the socioeconomic include employment status of an individual, the
income that one generates and if one is under good standardized housing (Shou-Hsia and Tung-
Liang, 2017). The third is health behavior which talks about the attitudes, beliefs and education
level of an individual. The practices and patterns affect healthcare, for example, alcohol
consumption, and drinking may lead to severe health implications.
Comparison between Brazil and Australia healthcare system.
The Brazilian healthcare system has some similarities and differences with that of Australia. To
begin with the similarities, both systems have embraced a mixed welfare system which means
that they both have public and private healthcare systems working simultaneously. The public
healthcare system in Brazil and the Medicare system in Australia. The government sponsors the
Brazilian system through taxes that are paid by the citizens which are also the same case for the
Medicare system in Australia (Meades and Roberts, 2017). In both states, the wealthier

Running Head: Universal Healthcare 5
individuals have subscribed to private healthcare premiums of their choice and used cash from
their pockets to pay for their health services. The poor have no option but to use the government
scheme and get health care from public health facilities. Another similarity is that both countries
have made sure that health is a right to the citizens of their country. They have both invested
heavily in training, recruiting and maintaining medical practitioners. They have invested in
research, education and the equipping of health facilities. They have ensured that health facilities
have drugs and that the drugs are of universally accepted standards. The Brazilian government
has also been able to provide that there has been the introduction of vaccinations and prenatal
care for their women which is also being applied in the Australian healthcare system. There have
also been differences between the Brazilian and Australian healthcare systems. Brazil being a
developing country has high levels of poverty, which means that those who cannot access
healthcare have been forced to sell off their property or fundraise through friends and family to
obtain medical healthcare (Reddy et al. 2011). On the contrary, the government of Australia
gives free medical healthcare to those who cannot afford to pay for the Medicare scheme
accorded by the government.
Conclusion.
Every state should attain to ensure that universal health care has been achieved to match the
world health organization standards. States should give healthcare a priority because of its
essential role in growth and development. All governments should make made sure that the
public hospitals are equipped to match the international standards. The availability of medicine
in all facilities is vital for ensuring that drugs are administered to the sick. All governments
should ensure that health workers have insurance, pension and education schemes that address
their welfare.

Running Head: Universal Healthcare 6
References
Hobdell, M., Petersen, P. E., Clarkson, J., & Johnson, N. (2013). Global goals for oral health
2020. International dental journal, 53(5), 285-288.
Kwon, S. (2015). Thirty years of national health insurance in South Korea: lessons for achieving
universal health care coverage. Health policy and planning, 24(1), 63-71.
Lu, J. F. R., & Hsiao, W. C. (2013). Does universal health insurance make health care
unaffordable? Lessons from Taiwan. Health affairs, 22(3), 77-88.
Meades, K., & Roberts, R. (2017). Universal health care. American Heart Hospital Journal, 5(4),
217-222.
Reddy, K. S., Patel, V., Jha, P., Paul, V. K., Kumar, A. S., Dandona, L., & Lancet India Group
for Universal Healthcare. (2011). Towards achievement of universal health care in India
by 2020: a call to action. The Lancet, 377(9767), 760-768.
Shou-Hsia, C., & Tung-Liang, C. (2017). The effect of universal health insurance on health care
utilization in Taiwan: results from a natural experiment. Jama, 278(2), 89-93.
Stephens, C., Porter, J., Nettleton, C., & Willis, R. (2016). Disappearing, displaced, and
undervalued: a call to action for Indigenous health worldwide. The lancet, 367(9527),
2019-2028.