Search

This article deals with the social democratic aspiration of equitable access to health care in Bulgaria, a country in transition since 1989 from communism and a command economy to democracy and a free market. The focus is on access to health services and resources after the introduction of a universal health insurance system, with particular reference to formal and informal out-of-pocket payments for health care. The paper reports empirical results from a national household expenditure survey, supplemented with a semi-structured interview, conducted at the end of the survey period (April-May 2002). The results bring to light the groups in society who suffer most in this scenario: the poor, Roma, older persons and those living in towns and villages. The study reveals that the stated aim of the National Health Insurance Fund, to provide equitable access to health care, is a mirage rather than a reality, as the vast bulk of health care is self funded. This paper has particular significance for understanding the challenges faced by post-communist states in their attempts to achieve social democratic health care reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As Leader of the Opposition in 1987, the current Prime Minister of Australia John Howard, stated unequivocally that he would dismantle Medicare at his first opportunity. By April 2000, the Health Minister in a Howard-led government proudly proclaimed to the Australian Parliament the Coalition was 'the best friend Medicare ever had'. Such a shift in ideology and policy position appears remarkable, overturning more than 60 years of conservative opposition to a universal, publicly funded, health care system. This paper traces the shift from the lead-up to the 1996 election until 2000, interrogating official policy texts to map how the Coalition reconfigured its own policy narrative about the Australian health care system. This paper argues that in order to understand contemporary reforms to the health care system, we must consider the way in which those reforms provide solutions to discursively, rather than objectively constructed, policy problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the extent to which US citizenship status affects the probability of a person's having a usual source of care and the predictors associated with access to health care among non-citizens. The research is founded on the analysis of data from the 2005 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) (n = 33,187 adults, ages 18–64). Guided by a modified Andersen model of access to health care, the researchers conducted a series of logistic regression analyses using the survey data to compare native-born citizens with non-citizens who were 1.6 times less likely to access a usual source of care. Among non-citizens, insurance status, shorter duration of residence in the United States, and lower levels of English proficiency were related to a lower probability of having a usual source of care. Based on this research it is argued that affordable health care and health insurance options and access to culturally and linguistically sensitive services are needed to increase access to health care among these identified subgroups of non-citizens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]