The Pros and Cons of Each Policy Change Option

The Pros and Cons of Each Policy Change Option

Project description
I need a response to each of the two passages with 125 words each, no title page, no reference page, 2 references after each paragraph.

Pros & Cons-Penny

Section 2102 of PL 111-148 does not provide healthcare coverage for all children without insurance coverage. My proposal change is that all children should have healthcare coverage regardless of income. According to Gorin (2011), by 2019 the Affordable Care Act (ACA) there will be 23 million people still uninsured.
Major policy changes options
3 cons
• Financial cost and resources “Health care absorbs as escalating proportion of government and private sector spending, without
commensurate benefits in health status and outcomes of care” (Shaffer, 2013, p.1).
• Difficult to gain acceptance from opposing parties
• Lack of understanding of end result of major change
3 pros
• Potential to expand coverage options
• Requires higher levels of health care quality and outcomes
• Closes gaps of disparities
No policy change option
3 cons
• Status quo for healthcare
• Continuation of increase of healthcare cost
• Continue focus on disease process and not prevention
3 pros
• Current public policy stays in place
• Healthcare coverage continues for those currently covered
• Reimbursement remains unchanged
Incrementalism policy change “Incremental changes or actions may have better chance of success than change of major proportions” (Mason, Leavitt, & Chaffee, 2012, p. 71-72).
3 cons
• Resistance to change
• Keeping stakeholders interest and support
• Slow process
3 pros
• Pilot approach to implementation allows acceptance to change
• Allows for change while implementing
• Allows evaluation process for change
Gorin, S. H. (2011). The affordable care act: Background and analysis. Health & Social Work, 83-86. Retrieved from:
Mason, D. J., Leavitt, J. K., & Chaffee, M. W. (2012). Policy & Politics in Nursing and Health Care (6th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders.
Shaffer, E. R. (2013, February). The affordable care act: The value of systemic disruption. American Journal of Public Health, 1-4. Retrieved from:

Policy Change option Linda Bjork 7/4/2013 9:40:50 AM
PL 111-148 Section 10501 “Requires the Secretary, acting through the Director of CDC to establish a national diabetes prevention program targeted at adults at high risk for diabetes” (The Staff of the Washington Post, 2010, p. 250). This is in attempt to eliminate the preventable burden of diabetes among adults. My proposal change is to include children 5-18 years of age. Diabetes Type 2 once considered an adult disease now affects over 13,000 young people (Norr, 1999-2013). By providing diabetes prevention education programs to children as young as 5 years of age efforts can be made to promote long-term lifestyles that will decrease or delay the chronic disease of diabetes.

Policy options

Do nothing

The current practice will continue.

Pros: 1. Status quo for adult diabetes prevention programs.

2. Grant funds will continue to support the adult prevention programs.

3. Focus will continue to be on adult elimination of diabetes.

Cons: 1. Children 5-18 years of age will not benefit from national prevention programs.

2. No national grant funds will be allocated to support a children’s program.

3. Focus of elimination of diabetes will be diverted away from children.

Incremental change

Incremental policy change focuses on parts of an existing problem to make changes, rather than tackling the whole problem (Mason, Leavitt, & Chaffee, 2012). This option makes it easier to improve policies that already exist.

Pros: 1. By adding children to the proposal, both adults and children will benefit from prevention programs.

2. Grant funds will support adult and children prevention programs.

3. There will be an increase focus will on children’s needs of prevention.

Cons: 1. Attention will be taken away from just the adults that need diabetes education.

2. National grants funds will be divided between the two groups; adults and children.

3. A greater amount of the focus may go to the prevention of diabetes in children.

Major change

Reflects a specific view with an optimal outcome solution which will make it easier to guide stakeholders to support change (Decision Innovation, 2013).

Pros: 1. A policy proposal section to be added just to target children.

2. Obtain national grant funds focused just on programs for prevention programs for prevention and elimination of diabetes among children.

3. A new proposal section would highlight the focus to children’s needs for diabetes prevention.

Cons: 1. Difficulty in gaining stakeholder and political backing.

2. Difficulties gaining sufficient amount of grant funds due to national debt increasing.

3. Proposal may take away too much focus and adult programs may loose support.



To enjoy our big discount, type the Discount Code on the Discount box & click Use Code to apply the discount.


Coupon Code - UPE30
  • Enjoy a lifetime discount of 30%!
  • Enter the code UPE30