[PASSED] Quality in Health Services

[Arkinesia]

II - Full coverage, with priority given to preventive activities, without prejudice to assistance services;

Ambassador Melican rose once more, and must have a quibble.

I don't like the idea of preventive care being advocated. If Mean Old Man's First Tort Reform passed, and I shall add an opinion on that, actually…If Mean Old Man's First Tort Reform Act had passed, as it should, we wouldn't need any such things as this, because doctors wouldn't have to worry about wanton malpractice suits with no apparent meaning nor purpose.

In fact, I don't doubt a smidgen of tort reform would be out of place here.

Hon. Ambassador Melican, the aforementioned part has nothing to do whatsoever with malpractice suits; it deals with the fact that it is much better (whether from the human or economic point of view) to, for example, periodically scan female patients for incipient forms of cervical cancers (Pap smears) or breast tumors (mammograms) than to wait for everybody to have full-blown and costlier-to-treat tumors; but - of course - if should a patient with a full-blown tumor arrive at a hospital, said patient shall be treated to the best of the doctors' abilities (the meaning of "without prejudice to assistance services").

Feel free to ask any further questions.

Yours,

(OOC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preventive_medicine)

I don't disagree, some preventive medicine is good, but priority to preventive treatment? Also, what is covered should be strictly defined. We don't want to have to shell out billions of bahpiahars for hypochondriacs who think they have cancer when they in fact have a cold.

[Grays Harbor]

II - Full coverage, with priority given to preventive activities, without prejudice to assistance services;

Ambassador Melican rose once more, and must have a quibble.

I don't like the idea of preventive care being advocated. If Mean Old Man's First Tort Reform passed, and I shall add an opinion on that, actually…If Mean Old Man's First Tort Reform Act had passed, as it should, we wouldn't need any such things as this, because doctors wouldn't have to worry about wanton malpractice suits with no apparent meaning nor purpose.

In fact, I don't doubt a smidgen of tort reform would be out of place here.

Hon. Ambassador Melican, the aforementioned part has nothing to do whatsoever with malpractice suits; it deals with the fact that it is much better (whether from the human or economic point of view) to, for example, periodically scan female patients for incipient forms of cervical cancers (Pap smears) or breast tumors (mammograms) than to wait for everybody to have full-blown and costlier-to-treat tumors; but - of course - if should a patient with a full-blown tumor arrive at a hospital, said patient shall be treated to the best of the doctors' abilities (the meaning of "without prejudice to assistance services").

Feel free to ask any further questions.

Yours,

(OOC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preventive_medicine)

I don't disagree, some preventive medicine is good, but priority to preventive treatment? Also, what is covered should be strictly defined. We don't want to have to shell out billions of bahpiahars for hypochondriacs who think they have cancer when they in fact have a cold.

This is what happens when an international busybody determines they know what is best for everybody, and that all nations must share identical systems.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I also note that I find it hard to find the preamble. A preamble pretty much makes the case for the right for civilians of member states to access quality health care. It should be considered to make things clearer.

[Sionis Prioratus]

This is what happens when an international busybody determines they know what is best for everybody, and that all nations must share identical systems.

3) And if decentralization and community participation are not the right route for a nation? [...] The point I am trying to make is that there should be no mandate about how a nation's health care system works, no matter how vague or broad it is. There is no need to go beyond mandating that all people have access to affordable health care.

I think I know what your concerns are. That a mandated health care system, in the process of its implementation, would downgrade the quality of what you already have, or any other Nation with an optimal health care system. That shall not be the case. My goal is not to homogenize the care offered, but to ensure everybody has decent standards of quality in health care. If any Nation has the means to offer the very best to every single one of its citizens, so be it.

It would be far more interesting and productive if the Delegation of Grays Harbor would stop flat out lying, but, by all means, suit yourself.

I am wondering how Grays Harbor's "Health" "Care" "system" might be... (since they - why? - will not reveal it)

1) Do not get sick.
2) If you do get sick, die quickly.
3) ?????????
4) PROFIT!

Goddess bless these poor citizens' souls.

[Grays Harbor]

This is what happens when an international busybody determines they know what is best for everybody, and that all nations must share identical systems.

3) And if decentralization and community participation are not the right route for a nation? [...] The point I am trying to make is that there should be no mandate about how a nation's health care system works, no matter how vague or broad it is. There is no need to go beyond mandating that all people have access to affordable health care.

I think I know what your concerns are. That a mandated health care system, in the process of its implementation, would downgrade the quality of what you already have, or any other Nation with an optimal health care system. That shall not be the case. My goal is not to homogenize the care offered, but to ensure everybody has decent standards of quality in health care. If any Nation has the means to offer the very best to every single one of its citizens, so be it.

It would be far more interesting and productive if the Delegation of Grays Harbor would stop flat out lying, but, by all means, suit yourself.

I am wondering how Grays Harbor's "Health" "Care" "system" might be... (since they - why? - will not reveal it)

1) Do not get sick.
2) If you do get sick, die quickly.
3) ?????????
4) PROFIT!
Goddess bless these poor citizens' souls.

right, because if it is not socialized government run healthcare, that is exactly what happens.

(and you may want to tone down the rhetoric there, sparky.)

[Tergnitz]

su·per·flu·ous (s-pûrfl-s)
adj.
Being beyond what is required or sufficient.
[Middle English, from Old French superflueux, from Latin superfluus, from superfluere, to overflow : super-, super- + fluere, to flow; see bhleu- in Indo-European roots.]

From that, the only logical inference is that every human being under the World Assembly already has universal and comprehensive health coverage!

No, what that means is that universal health care for the world assembly is not required, nor is it a "basic human right"

While your Ambassador was too busy fumbling over definitions, while at the same time interpreting them incorrectly. The delegation from Grays Harbor aptly summed up my case in one sentence.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Decentralization, as it is currently in the draft, is a bad thing? If it is so, why?

I suppose the short answer is simply because the Public Health Service -- Glen-Rhodes' version of nationalized health care -- simply isn't organized to be managed at local levels. Local and provincial governments do not have the constitutional authority to manage and disperse federal funds or services. To comply with the decentralization mandate, we would have to completely reform the PHS into some kind of province-by-province system. The problem with doing such is that the federal government would then not have the constitutional authority themselves to regulate those systems. It would lead to inefficiency and cost increases, not to mention it would be subject to the whims of provincial politics, which tends to be less homogeneous than on the federal level.

As I stated earlier, I think an acceptable route to take would be to declare health care a human right -- which it absolutely is -- then provide World Assembly assistance for improving world-wide health care. The WHA could establish a program to provide doctors for areas of the world that are severely lacking, through a volunteer program. (OOC: "Doctors Without Borders".) It could build and staff permanent clinics and hospitals in severely impoverished nations, as well. The key is that we can increase world health without mandating nationalized health care for all nations.

[float=left]Dr. Bradford William Castro

Ambassador-at-Large,
Permanent Chief of Mission for World Assembly affairs,
the Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes[/float][float=right][/float]

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Dr. Castro of Glen Rhodes has made an extremely important point: this is because some member states simply do not have the money to fund their own health service. Therefore, extending the functions of the IHACC (GA#51) to provide volunteer medical staff for poor member states may be what this draft needs, and it would be very effective.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Dr. Castro of Glen Rhodes has made an extremely important point: this is because some member states simply do not have the money to fund their own health service. Therefore, extending the functions of the IHACC (GA#51) to provide volunteer medical staff for poor member states may be what this draft needs, and it would be very effective.

Yes, Glen-Rhodes's Delegation makes important points... and the IHACC... I'm honored the Delegate from Charlotte Ryberg would offer an institution created by a Resolution the Hon. Delegate from Charlotte Ryberg herself authored. Will look into it.

Time for a redraft! Which I shall still not assume to be the final one. Nevertheless, does anybody else has anything else construtive to add before I do it?

Thanks to all,

Yours,

[Burninati0n]

"Nations shall retain full freedom to allow or not participation of private enterprise in their health care systems. "

Grammar fail? Try:

"Nations shall retain the right to allow or disallow private enterprise in their health care systems."

[Sionis Prioratus]

"Nations shall retain full freedom to allow or not participation of private enterprise in their health care systems. "

Grammar fail? Try:

"Nations shall retain the right to allow or disallow private enterprise in their health care systems."

(OOC: Hey! I am a Grammar Nazi, see Forum 7!! And I can see nothing wrong grammatically with the sentence as-is... But if somebody could enlighten the issue...)

[Burninati0n]

It's not really wrong, just awkwardly phrased.

"...freedom to allow or not participation of private enterprise..."

Say that out loud. It doesn't work.

[Allbeama]

I humbly ask all Delegations, especially the ones who raised the point:

Decentralization, as it is currently in the draft, is a bad thing? If it is so, why?

Yours,

As previously stated we oppose this only if it means to disassemble our federal centralized systems to provide health services to our people.

[Mad Sheep Railgun]

"Nations shall retain full freedom to allow or not participation of private enterprise in their health care systems. "

Grammar fail? Try:

"Nations shall retain the right to allow or disallow private enterprise in their health care systems."

(OOC: Hey! I am a Grammar Nazi, see Forum 7!! And I can see nothing wrong grammatically with the sentence as-is... But if somebody could enlighten the issue...)

Comma after 'not'.

[Sionis Prioratus]

THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD ASSEMBLED,

RECOGNIZING health care is a universal human right and a duty of every Nation, guaranteed through social and economic policies aimed at reducing the risk of disease and universal & equal access to the actions & services for its promotion, protection and recovery;

FURTHER RECOGNIZING health actions & services have the highest public relevance, being the duty of the Nations to have, under the law, government regulation, supervision and control, to be carried out directly or through third parties, and the duty of the World Health Authority (WHA) in assisting such actions if, and only if, so asked by any Nation;

DO THEREFORE ESTABLISH:

1) The public health actions & services shall integrate a regionalized network and constitute separate, single systems in each and every Nation, organized according to the following guidelines:

a) Full coverage, with priority given to preventive activities, without prejudice to assistance services;
b) Community participation;
c) Cooperation between Nations.

2) The health care system shall be financed by National budgets as well as other private voluntary sources; the WHA may also fund at the request of any Nation, but not before a thorough audit of the health care system, so as to ensure transparency and the honesty of the process.

3) The International Humanitarian Aid Coordination Committee (IHACC) shall provide voluntary human health care resources and donated medical supplies to Nations that ask for such help, due to issues such as, but not limited to, extreme poverty or disasters (as defined in international law).

4) Nations and any political subdivisions shall:

a) Invest, at least annually, in public health actions & services, aiming at the gradual reduction of regional disparities;
b) Establish together the standards of review, evaluation and control of expenditure on health in the Universal, National and local spheres;
c) The WHA shall assist the shaping of said standards if, and only if, so asked by any Nation.

5) The local managers of the health care system may allow health community agents to combat endemic diseases, according to nature and complexity of their tasks and requirements for its operation.

6) Nations shall retain full freedom to allow or not, participation of private enterprise in their health care systems.

a) It is forbidden to allocate public funds to aid or provide grants to for-profit private health care institutions;
b) The National laws shall provide for the conditions and requirements to facilitate the removal of organs, tissues and substances for human transplantation, research and treatment;
c) The National laws shall provide for collection, processing and transfusion of blood and its derivatives, which are forbidden any kind of marketing.

7) The health care system is responsible for, in accordance with international law:

a) Performing actions to promote the health of the worker;
b) Organizing the training of human resources in health;
c) Participating in policy formulation and implementation of basic sanitation actions.

Second edit. Various formatting changes. Additions in red; commentaries [in brackets].

THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD ASSEMBLED,

RECOGNIZING health care is a universal human right and a duty of every Nation, guaranteed through social and economic policies aimed at reducing the risk of disease and universal & equal access to the actions & services for its promotion, protection and recovery;

FURTHER RECOGNIZING health actions & services have the highest public relevance, being the duty of the Nations to have, under the law, government regulation, supervision and control, to be carried out directly or through third parties, and the duty of the World Health Authority (WHA) in assisting such actions if, and only if, so asked by any Nation;

DO THEREFORE ESTABLISH:

1) The public health actions & services shall integrate a regionalized network and constitute separate, single systems in each and every Nation, organized according to the following guidelines:

a) Full coverage, with priority given to preventive activities, without prejudice to assistance services;
b) Community participation;
c) Cooperation between Nations.
[removed decentralization clause]

2) The health care system shall be financed by National budgets as well as other private voluntary sources; the WHA may also fund at the request of any Nation, but not before a thorough audit of the health care system, so as to ensure transparency and the honesty of the process.

3) The International Humanitarian Aid Coordination Committee (IHACC) shall provide voluntary human health care resources and donated medical supplies to Nations that ask for such help, due to issues such as, but not limited to, extreme poverty or disasters (as defined in international law).

4) Nations and any political subdivisions shall:

a) Invest, at least annually, in public health actions & services, aiming at the gradual reduction of regional disparities; [Nations should have full freedom to make investments in shorter periods, should they wish]
b) Establish together the standards of review, evaluation and control of expenditure on health in the Universal, National and local spheres;
c) The WHA shall assist the shaping of said standards if, and only if, so asked by any Nation. [there was already an “if”; just reinforcing the message]

5) The local managers of the health care system may allow health community agents to combat endemic diseases, according to nature and complexity of their tasks and requirements for its operation.

6) Nations shall retain full freedom to allow or not, participation of private enterprise in their health care systems.

a) It is forbidden to allocate public funds to aid or provide grants to for-profit private health care institutions;
b) The National laws shall provide for the conditions and requirements to facilitate the removal of organs, tissues and substances for human transplantation, research and treatment;
c) The National laws shall provide for collection, processing and transfusion of blood and its derivatives, which are forbidden any kind of marketing. [separated clauses so as to avoid ambiguity]

7) The health care system is responsible for, in accordance with international law:

a) Performing actions to promote the health of the worker;
b) Organizing the training of human resources in health;
c) Participating in policy formulation and implementation of basic sanitation actions.

[Free Hawaii]

It is just such blatant social engineering resolutions like this which make us very glad we are not a WA member nation.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Dear Observer Delegation:

Our Intelligence services have discovered the following:

Free Hawaii is ranked 21,061st in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita). Sionis Prioratus is ranked 49,150th in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita).

Some social engineer, I am.

Yours,

[Tanaara]

OOC: SP, your unpleasant attitude does you no favors in convincing others to support your efforts.

IC: "I too am glad that we of the Domination are not a part of this wretched mess, otherwise our perfectly good health care system would be folded, spindled and mutilated by such a fiasco as this proposal" The unDelegate observed as he tossed the papers into the circular file. "The delegate from Greys Harbor indeed spoke very well, and I applaud his stance,"

[Free Hawaii]

Dear Observer Delegation:

Our Intelligence services have discovered the following:

Free Hawaii is ranked 21,061st in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita). Sionis Prioratus is ranked 49,150th in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita).

Some social engineer, I am.

Yours,

IC - The last time we checked, welfare and health care were not the same thing. So next time try comparing pineapples to pineapples, not pineapples to halibut.

OOC - Tanaara's right. Your pugnacious attitude to anybody who disagrees with you, which I have noticed in more than one thread here, does nothing to further your cause. In fact, I'd say it harms it more than helps it.

[The Adrian Empire]

It's been said by three other non-members; but I'll say it again, thank God I am not a member of the WA, with this mess.
I'll keep the Adrian Empire's Healthcare System as is, privatized hospitals with free insurance for citizens in addition to private programs.

May I ask why the priority on preventive medicine? Shouldn't it be a national decision to prioritize the health-care system, what if the health-care program were introduced to a place where everyone is healthy, and communicated diseases are rarely contracted but due to say liberal smoking, everyone has giant cancerous tumours in their lungs, I would think the government would want funds put into surgery and radiation.

[Enn]

Dear Observer Delegation:

Our Intelligence services have discovered the following:

Free Hawaii is ranked 21,061st in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita). Sionis Prioratus is ranked 49,150th in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita).

Some social engineer, I am.

Yours,

OOC: The game stats aren't always the best guide to how nations behave when they've got ambassadors here. We RP quite a bit.
Plus, in any case, the ambassador may well be personally in support of an opposition party rather than the current government.

[Sionis Prioratus]

OOC: The game stats aren't always the best guide to how nations behave when they've got ambassadors here. We RP quite a bit.
Plus, in any case, the ambassador may well be personally in support of an opposition party rather than the current government.

OOC: Good point.

IC: I retract my inferences based on earlier posted data.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

3) The International Humanitarian Aid Coordination Committee (IHACC) shall provide voluntary human health care resources and donated medical supplies to Nations that ask for such help, due to issues such as, but not limited to, extreme poverty or disasters (as defined in international law).

As defined by international law? That might be a HoC violation. It is possible to extend functions of existing committees but that should be additions to your draft, not a primary function of this draft. Try something like:

3) EXTENDS the functions of the International Humanitarian Aid Coordination Committee (IHACC) to train and provide their own voluntary health care resources and medical supplies to member states that ask for extra assistance, due to situations such as, but not limited to, extreme poverty or disasters;

But also note that I am still in favour of the preservation of the independence of Disaster Relief Agencies, and no need to worry as to how the extension will be funded, that's up to the WA staff.

FYI, we are 6,574th in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita)

5) The local managers of the health care system may allow health community agents to combat endemic diseases, according to nature and complexity of their tasks and requirements for its operation.

Is that covered by the Epidemic Response Act?

[Sionis Prioratus]

Esteemed Delegate, thank you very much for taking your time to assist in this endeavor.

As defined by international law? That might be a HoC violation. It is possible to extend functions of existing committees but that should be additions to your draft, not a primary function of this draft.

I wrote it like that on purpose, instead of as "stipulated by the Resolution #51" (which would be blatant). Ardchoille, I think, stipulated that the supreme test for HoC-ness is "Can the draft stand without the Resolution?" I thought, even if Res. #51 was repealed - Goddess forbid - another future Resolution could define "disaster". But you might be right, this might be too convoluted, and it is not an absolute phraseological necessity. So, "as defined by international law" is out.

Try something like:

3) EXTENDS the functions of the International Humanitarian Aid Coordination Committee (IHACC) to train and provide their own voluntary health care resources and medical supplies to member states that ask for extra assistance, due to situations such as, but not limited to, extreme poverty or disasters;

A marked improvement. More elegant, sober, and aesthetically pleasing. Will be incorporated fully (in the next redraft).

But also note that I am still in favour of the preservation of the independence of Disaster Relief Agencies, and no need to worry as to how the extension will be funded, that's up to the WA staff.

Not to worry. I did reread Res. #51 before redrafting, and I'm glad my concerns are also your concerns. Independence will be preserved. Actually, I think it would be illegal to do otherwise.

FYI, we are 6,574th in the world for Largest Welfare Programs (per capita)

(OOC - and sorry for answering OOC: Deeply sorry if SP passed the wrong impression. SP does not have a fingernail against Nations who are happy providing as much Welfare as they think they should and can do so. He does have nuclear weapons against Nations - observer Nations! - who come to the WA to mock it, and then blabber how much more Holier-than-Ev'rybody they are on account of being extreme capitalists, when the cold truth is Sionis Prioratus is more capitalistic than they all are. But, if there are Nations actually, truly happy with Welfare, who is Sionis Prioratus to judge? No-one. Back to IC...)

5) The local managers of the health care system may allow health community agents to combat endemic diseases, according to nature and complexity of their tasks and requirements for its operation.

Is that covered by the Epidemic Response Act?

I will review it. If redundant, will be excised.

Yours truly,

[Sionis Prioratus]

A question to the WA World:

Should priority be given to preventive activities, without prejudice to assistance services?

Do you agree preventive medicine saves a huge amount of economic resources; increases the median lifespan; prevent pain & suffering from occurring? If not, why?

If not, should they be put on equal footing? Or the inverse? Or is "preventive/assistance services" a false logical division, and should not be mentioned at all?

Yours,