I came across this article in the New York times and thought it related to areas in our class discussion where we talked about geographic locations defining community and types of prevention.
Upon first reading the article I thought it would be just another article about a comparative health system, and the struggles of attaining effective universal healthcare. Initially, the article does discuss many of the ins and outs of the new health care system in Mexico, and even gives many examples of the successes that the new health care has brought about. While many of the people told stories of quality care at no cost to the individual, there were some who are still not seeing the health care system as ideal.
One of the problems that the article brought up was something we have mentioned many times in class, that the poorer states are lacking in health care quality. One of the points we have brought up in class is the idea that communities are sometimes defined by socioeconomic status and usually these are the groups that see more injustices in health care.
It seems that even in Mexico’s universal system these divisions between quality of care based on socioeconomic status are still present. Another divider and definition of communities in the Mexican health Care system was the idea that, “Mexicans are treated very much a function of where they live.” In class part of the discussion was the association of communities based on geographic location.
Luckily, in this new health care system the Mexican people are not confined to their geographic locations and are allowed access to the other health centers and better care. This is one way the article mentioned that they are striving to offer better care to the impoverished. Of course, barriers to this lie in the ability of those in poverty to actually travel and stay in another state that may offer better care.
Near the end, the article also mentioned that the system is trying to adopt centers that focus on prevention and the rights of patients, which relates to the shifting of care to a primary prevention that we talked about in class when showing the model of the levels of care.
Our first reading, prevention is primary, also talked about the need for prevention in public health. Currently, the article mentioned more about the Mexican health care system offering tests to citizens to detect different diseases, such as HIV, which accounts for a level of secondary prevention. The mobile centers mentioned at the end of the article show the shifting toward primary prevention, and the recognition for the need of primary prevention. However, they did mention while this is acknowledged as the plan, it is never known exactly who these plans will turn into a reality.
I believe that from the facts presented, the overall improvement of health care for the majority of the Mexican people has been successful. I also believe that it is important that the government has realized they still have many improvements to their new system, and are working towards solutions. Even though the care for the impoverished is still marginalized it is seeing overall improvement, which I think can continue to grow into a great system.