In 1988, the Brazilian Constitution stated that health was a right of every citizen, and the duty to provide that healthcare fell on the State. This lead to the implementation of the Sistema Único de Saúde, translated as Unified Health System (SUS). According to the Brazilian Ministry of Health, the SUS is one of the biggest public health systems in the world, nearly 75% of Brazil’s 210 million citizens rely exclusively on SUS for their healthcare needs. SUS covers services that range from simple procedures such as blood pressure monitoring to organ transplants (Ministry of Health, n.d.). How did the SUS work through the Zika virus outbreak of 2015 and the subsequent cases of microcephaly and other neurological diseases that followed?
Breaks …show more content…
That does not mean that the SUS has been completely effective, or that the care is fair and equitable across the board. A study that compared Brazil’s healthcare to the emergence of the Affordable Healthcare Act in the United States. An article pointed out that because of the geography of Brazil, specifically remote areas, that care is not the same. For example, in São Paulo, there are plenty of hospitals, but in remote areas of the Amazon, small clinics are few and far in-between. The article also pointed out that there are technological and financial gaps to care, and that these gaps are seen compacted by the geographical barrier. The financial barrier is evident when the fact that SUS will not cover some medications that are necessary, because the cost is too high. This does not mean that SUS is a failed system, in fact Brazil had one of the highest vaccination rates in the world (Bajak, …show more content…
All the information on the outbreak and the cases of neurological diseases that occurred were reactive. The SUS launched a campaign that has worked towards the eradication of mosquitos, which will lower the incidence of Zika, and to deter pregnancies. The issue of the geographical barrier is once again made evident, as the campaign and resources are not reaching the Brazilians in the remote areas as easily as the prosperous areas. The resources that have reached some of the heavier populated areas are; contraceptives, health education, insect repellent, and mosquito nets, but this was not equitable for all people in Brazil, and specifically for the rural at-risk population (Sherman, 2016). The lack of preventive goods such as inspect repellent played a key role in one specific case, where a mother who was in her third trimester was not aware of the negative outcomes of Zika and it was not until she travelled over 100 miles from her rural village to a hospital in a larger city where ultrasound services were available. The mother claimed that the program for repellant, specifically for expectant mothers never reached her community. This was further exacerbated by the fact that the nearest maternity clinic was 20 miles away, over difficult country roads and the exam did not find anything wrong with her baby (Hennigan, 2016). As previously stated, the SUS
Breaks …show more content…
That does not mean that the SUS has been completely effective, or that the care is fair and equitable across the board. A study that compared Brazil’s healthcare to the emergence of the Affordable Healthcare Act in the United States. An article pointed out that because of the geography of Brazil, specifically remote areas, that care is not the same. For example, in São Paulo, there are plenty of hospitals, but in remote areas of the Amazon, small clinics are few and far in-between. The article also pointed out that there are technological and financial gaps to care, and that these gaps are seen compacted by the geographical barrier. The financial barrier is evident when the fact that SUS will not cover some medications that are necessary, because the cost is too high. This does not mean that SUS is a failed system, in fact Brazil had one of the highest vaccination rates in the world (Bajak, …show more content…
All the information on the outbreak and the cases of neurological diseases that occurred were reactive. The SUS launched a campaign that has worked towards the eradication of mosquitos, which will lower the incidence of Zika, and to deter pregnancies. The issue of the geographical barrier is once again made evident, as the campaign and resources are not reaching the Brazilians in the remote areas as easily as the prosperous areas. The resources that have reached some of the heavier populated areas are; contraceptives, health education, insect repellent, and mosquito nets, but this was not equitable for all people in Brazil, and specifically for the rural at-risk population (Sherman, 2016). The lack of preventive goods such as inspect repellent played a key role in one specific case, where a mother who was in her third trimester was not aware of the negative outcomes of Zika and it was not until she travelled over 100 miles from her rural village to a hospital in a larger city where ultrasound services were available. The mother claimed that the program for repellant, specifically for expectant mothers never reached her community. This was further exacerbated by the fact that the nearest maternity clinic was 20 miles away, over difficult country roads and the exam did not find anything wrong with her baby (Hennigan, 2016). As previously stated, the SUS