The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and Medicaid
The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and Medicaid are critical federal-state initiatives that provide financial access to care for nearly nine million uninsured children from low-income households (Lowrey, 2017).
Essential Pediatric Primary Care Services
While each state has its own laws, the joint fund covers essential pediatric primary care services such as immunizations, routine exams, doctor visits, and prescriptions (www.Benefits.gov, 2017).
Comprehensive Coverage for Pregnant Women
Some states have also extended comprehensive coverage to pregnant women. The cover has removed the cost barrier, allowing low-income children to live a dignified life.
Unreliability of CHIP and Medicaid
Despite efforts to ensure that young registrants are not refused care due to a lack of funds, CHIP and Medicaid are notoriously unreliable. For instance, the majority of states have warned they may stop CHIP after the Congress failed to reauthorize the funding (Lowrey, 2017). The source of fund is associated with reduced access to specialized treatments as well as misuse of inpatient services. A number of scholars have also raised concerns that the program should be reinstituted to address emerging health needs.
Private Health Insurance
On the other hand, private health insurance is considered a more reliable source of the fund because of its sustainability. The cover ensures children access needed care, including specialty services.
Challenges of Private Health Insurance
Despite the notions of superiority, the kitty is also faced with many challenges that disadvantage pediatric patients. For instance, CHIP offers better access to trauma facilities when compared with private insurance (Wang, Saynina, Kuntz-Duriseti, Mahlow, & Wise, 2008). Children relying on the private cover also have more unmet mental health care needs. Kataoka, Zhang, & Wells (2002) highlight the disparity, noting that the burden of unfulfilled psychological care is as weighty as that of the uninsured minors. When compared with public covers, private funding is associated with more user charges (DeVoe et al., 2011). The aspect explains why children with private option have a higher total medical spending when compared with their counterparts from low-income families.
References
DeVoe, J. E., Tillotson, C. J., Wallace, L. S., Selph, S., Graham, A., & Angier, H. (2011). Comparing types of health insurance for children: a public option versus a private option. Medical care, 49(9), 818
Kataoka, S. H., Zhang, L., & Wells, K. B. (2002). Unmet need for mental health care among US children: Variation by ethnicity and insurance status. American Journal of Psychiatry, 159(9), 1548-1555.
Lowrey, A. (2017). The Damage to Children's Health Insurance Is Already Being Done. The Atlantic. Retrieved 19 December 2017, from https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-threat-to-childrens-health-insurance/546662/
Wang, N. E., Saynina, O., Kuntz-Duriseti, K., Mahlow, P., & Wise, P. H. (2008). Variability in the pediatric utilization of trauma facilities in California: 1999 to 2005. Annals of emergency medicine, 52(6), 607-615.
www.Benefits.gov. (2017). State Children's Health Insurance Program | Benefits.gov. Benefits.gov. Retrieved 19 December 2017, from https://www.benefits.gov/benefits/benefit-details/607
