In some nations like United Kingdom and Spain, the government has highest level of involvement in providing health care to all the citizens based on the residential status where insurance coverage is not mandatory. In Britain, the National Insurance Act 1911 can be considered as the initiative taken towards the provision of universal health care. It covered the salaried employees and their family members who contributed monitorily towards the health care setups. However, it continued up to 1948 when the National Health Service was created and universal health care security was provided to all legal residents. In some other nations, the governments involve insurance agencies to operate the health schemes and the beneficiaries and their employers are asked to pay the premiums for their health care facilities. In several European nations, the efforts for establishing the universal health care systems were launched immediately after the second world war and one shouldn’t forget the contribution made by Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 in this process. However, nations like USA didn’t implement the universal health care system (Armstrong et al., 1999; Institute of Medicine at the National Academies of Science, 2004.).
Overall, the universal health care is operated in several nations, what ever the style may be, and we have to see whether it is successful in meeting the health requirement of people. If so, why not this universal health care is implemented in all other nations? This makes us to debate over the advantages and disadvantages of the universal health care system and let us analyse them one by one.
Universal health care is a broad concept that has been implemented in many countries and was found to be highly useful for the benefit of the people (Conrad, 2008). The main advantage of this system is to ensure the social security to all the citizens of the country. In other words, health is a