NURS 8100 Describe One or More Conditions or Challenges Specifically Related to the Passing of the PPACA

NURS 8100 Describe One or More Conditions or Challenges Specifically Related to the Passing of the PPACA

NURS 8100 Describe One or More Conditions or Challenges Specifically Related to the Passing of the PPACA

One feature of the US health care system is that it is the most expensive healthcare in the world with results that would not agree with the cost. It is interesting to see that the US healthcare system has tried to evolve over the years and in that evolving has actually increased the cost of healthcare (Bodenheimer & Grumbach, 2020). Competition has fueled the improvement of healthcare, but at the cost of raising healthcare costs for the individual. There are other countries that have better health care systems in place, for a fraction of the cost. It would be interesting to investigate the actual cost of care and how much insurance companies gain compared to their actual payout. There is much that could be improved in the US health care system. It could be possible that the monetary issues prevent there from being major reform to the system because companies make such a large sum of money that they do not want things to change. As the US health care system has tried to change and become seemingly more affordable through the use of policy changes there has been an increase in the amount of money that they government pays, which is actually paid by US citizens through taxes (Bodenheimer & Grumbach, 2020). It seems that whenever the US health care system is taking one step forward it is also taking two steps back.

Challenges

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) did provide more individuals with health care coverage. This has improved the health of many individuals. One condition of the ACA is that it protects individuals with preexisting conditions from insurance companies denying care based on their condition (Healthcare.gov, n.d.). This is a great benefit for many individuals, but it comes at a cost for the insurance companies. This mandatory coverage causes insurance companies to then have to try to balance out coverage for those individuals that are ill versus those individuals who are healthy which can end up costing those individuals that are healthy to pay for others in their groups (Bodenheimer & Grumbach, 2020). This causes insurances to have to base their premiums on an experience rating versus a community rating which potentially provides unfair coverage to individuals (Bodenhemier & Grumbach, 2020). This seemingly minor change from the ACA has a ripple effect in the way that insurance companies need to charge for care and how they will determine premiums for individuals. The ACA in general is an example of how the policy making process is in the United States. Making or changing policy in the United States is a very slow, very incremental process which makes it hard to change or add policies (Walden University, LLC, 2011). The ACA was a worked on for a long time and because of the changes that were made many companies had to adjust accordingly. Health reform in the United States is difficult because there are so many entities that want to make sure that they are not being left out or hurt in decisions or policies that are being made and so they will stall or stonewall different policies if they feel that it does not benefit them. When there are policy changes then there are adjustments that need to be made and sometimes that effects so many different things that the changes end up being a negative instead of a positive, such as individuals who have to pay too much for the ACA healthcare and therefore opt out and are fined for that decision (Bodenheim & Grumbach, 2020).

References

Bodenheimer, T., & Grumbach, K. (2020).  Understanding health policy: A clinical approach (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

HealthCare.gov. (n.d.) Understanding the Affordable Care Act. Retrieved from https://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/about-the-aca/index.html

Walden University, LLC. (Executive Producer). (2011). Healthcare policy and advocacy: The policy process. Baltimore: Author.

After much public and political debate, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was signed into law by President Barack Obama. The PPACA is one of many health care reform efforts that have sought to correct key features of the U.S. health care system such as financing, service delivery, and care coordination. This week, you will examine the passage of PPACA as a milestone along the historical continuum of health care reform in the United States.

To prepare:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and media presentation, reflecting on the evolution of health care in the United States and the public’s response to health care reform efforts historically and currently.
Consider: What principal features of the U.S. health care system helped or hindered the enactment of federal health reform in March 2010? What challenges were encountered?
How do these conditions and/or challenges reflect characteristics of the policy process and the political environment?
By Day 3

Post a cohesive response that addresses the following:

Analyze at least one important feature of the U.S. health care system that is of particular interest to you. Explain why you think this feature is significant in terms of health policy and reform.
Describe one or more conditions or challenges specifically related to the passing of the PPACA. Explain how this exemplifies the nature of the policy-making process, and evaluate how it could relate to the question of why health reform in the United States has been so difficult.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.

By Day 6

Respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence or research.
Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Note: Please see the Syllabus and Discussion Rubric for formal Discussion question posting and response evaluation criteria.

Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

NURS_8100_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View
List View

Excellent Good Fair Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Points Range: 5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

Points Range: 4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (10%)
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Total Points: 30
Name: NURS_8100_Week1_Discussion_Rubric