“Coverage of mammograms for breast cancer screening is mandated by the Affordable Care Act, which provides that these be given without a coâ€pay or deductible beginning with plan years starting after August 1, 2012. This doesn’t apply to health plans that were in place before it was passed (called grandfathered plans). Those plans are covered by state laws, which vary, and other federal laws” (American Cancer Society, 2013).
Imagine that you are a member of Congress voting on a bill to amend the Affordable Care Act to mandate “grandfathered” and “individual” (self –paid) insurance plans to provide full coverage for biâ€ annual mammography screening for all females of 35 years and older and all females of 20 years and older who have documented breast cancer in an immediate family member. The legislation would nullify the individual state laws that have varied mandates and coverage, and grant all women access to free screening.
Insurance companies have lobbied you to vote against the amendment, and cancer awareness organizations (i.e. ACS, Komen) have lobbied you to vote for it. The insurance companies highlight the costs of screening. While the advocates for the amendment use data to support the cost to benefit analysis. As a member of Congress, you decide to carry out your own research on the benefits of screening (read the module texts) and using varied sources of data to inform your decision. After extensive research, you are now ready to cast your vote and prepare a statement for your constituency.
Cancer can be a very emotional subject, but the statements that you make and data that you report about the importance, harms, benefits or effects of mammography must be substantiated by a cited source. It is also important that additional sources you find are valid and not driven by bias.
Structure your paper as a letter to your constituents, explaining why you support or oppose such a policy. This statement would be posted to your congressional website.
ï‚· Introduce the proposed bill and state your position.
ï‚· Provide a context for your position, explaining the sources of information you have studied to
come to this conclusion.
ï‚· Argue the rationality of routine screening or not screening based on the scientific
research and social critique you have read. *Make sure to ‘Talk back to’ the opposing
argument/position with data.*
ï‚· Identify specific data (rates, probability, mean, etc) to support your argument.
o Include at least 5 varied data points to integrate into your analysis
ï‚· Explain your interpretation of the two data visualizations you selected to support your
argument. Critique the misleading data visualization.
ï‚· Discuss the implications of supporting or not supporting the bill mandating full coverage
for routine screening.
o What health implications does it make?
o What are the financial costs? – include the data you researched
o What might the cultural effects be?
o Who would benefit most from such a provision?
o What harm or backlash could you foresee from passing such a law?
ï‚· DUE Saturday, October 23, 11:59pm ET
Paper Formatting (standard)
Word Document file – attached for assignment submission
3 pages of text (approximately 1650 words, excluding charts and reference list)
Standard font (i.e. 12pt Times New Roman, 11pt Calibri)
Introduction – Body – Conclusion
Reference List – APA formatting
|Due By (Pacific Time)||10/23/2015 12:00 am|
out of 1971 reviews
out of 766 reviews
out of 1164 reviews
out of 721 reviews
out of 1600 reviews
out of 770 reviews
out of 766 reviews
out of 680 reviews