Women
and universal health care
Rosalia Sciortino ;
A health and social development
adviser and writer of “Menuju Kesehatan Madani” (Towards Civic Health, Gadjah
Mada University, 2007)
|
JAKARTA
POST, 08 Maret 2014
The
Indonesian government started 2014 with the much-hailed rollout of its
national health insurance (JKN) and the promise that by 2019, all the
country’s 250 million people will be covered by universal health care (UHC).
Concerns
are rife about the complexity of implementing such a large insurance scheme
and sustaining it over time, but few would dispute its lofty goals.
If
successful, JKN could significantly enhance people’s welfare and social
protection. Costs will no longer be a barrier to health care or be a cause of
impoverishment, with the gap in treatment for privileged and less privileged
groups expected to narrow.
Greater
fairness in society may not be too far-fetched, UNC having been proved to be
an effective redistribution mechanism in many other countries.
Among
those who have a stake in a well-functioning UHC program are women. They are
the majority of the population, they are generally in more underprivileged
positions, their health needs are many and they are also held responsible for
the health of their children and family.
They are
therefore highly dependent on health systems and are most affected by
income-related barriers and inequities that reduce their access to health
care.
UHC
schemes that address these conditions can have great impact on women’s
health. Quick, Jay and Langer conclude in a recent article that “UHC has proven a powerful driver of
women’s health in low-and middle-income countries, including Afghanistan,
Mexico, Rwanda and Thailand.”
Indonesia
clearly falls among the countries where women’s health is in dire need of
improvement and where UHC could make a difference if properly designed and
implemented. Irrespective of the recent controversy on whether maternal
mortality has increased or stagnated, it is clear that the 2012 Indonesia
Demographic and Health Survey, which reported a mortality rate of 359 deaths
per 100,000 live births, is high by all standards.
While
the use of midwives’ services has increased in recent years, for many women
quality maternal health services are not available, if not at significant
financial cost. Unmet needs for effective contraceptives remain great and the
occurrence of unsafe abortions is too sensitive to be dealt with.
Breast,
ovarian and cervical cancer is growing, but prevention, screening and
treatment services are lacking or are unaffordable. The feminization of the
AIDS epidemic is ongoing, but still, HIV testing is not provided as part of
government-subsidized antenatal services.
In view
of the potential gains, it seems surprising that women’s voices have not been
heard in public discussions leading to the launching of JKN and continue to
be missed in this early phase of implementation.
Planning
and socialization efforts do not specifically engage women and women’s groups
and NGOs have devoted little attention to JKN, leaving the policy arena to
health professionals, government officials and private lobbyists.
A review
of the first two months of JKN has mainly focused on problems with payment to
hospitals and complaints by patients who have encountered difficulties in
accessing the promised services. As systems become more established, however,
it may be time to pay more attention to JKN’s degree of gender-responsiveness
as a crucial element in improving women’s health.
JKN
includes a comprehensive package of sexual and reproductive health services.
However, many questions remain on how comprehensive it is and how exactly it
will be implemented. For instance, universal delivery care or Jampersal is
now integrated into JKN so it is important for pregnant women to be aware and
register as members to be able to access services.
As many
parents are already finding out, newborns will not be covered if they are not
registered first. Contraceptive services will also be provided under JKN.
The
Social Security Management Agency (BPJS) that administers JKN will fund the
provision of services and contraceptive methods will be procured and provided
by the National Family Planning Agency (BKKBN).
How is
this going to function in practice? Most importantly, how will women (and
men) be sure that their choices will be respected and that the complete
contraceptive spectrum from condom and pills to sterilization and vasectomy
is chargeable (the recommended “cafeteria approach”) and not, for instance,
only selected long-term contraceptives decided according to population
control priorities?
In
addition, will poor women continue to be “compelled” to use intrauterine
devices (IUDs) or implants after delivery as was the case in Jampersal, even
if it is not their choice and actually disregards their rights? For girls,
what package will be available, considering the increasing number of early
pregnancies in the 15-19 age group?
UHC
covers all types of cancer, but monitoring will be needed to ensure treatment
is timely and of quality for affected women. Pap tests and mammography are
foreseen in JKN, however their integration into basic health services will
require an effort as they presently are not routinely offered.
These
and other issues require the attention of women and women’s groups in the
framing of packages and their implementation, as well as in the monitoring of
women’s health services.
For a
start, they may demand sex-disaggregated data for JKN and the gathering of
data on priority women’s health services, health outcomes and equity
indicators.
All
information is invaluable to assess and ensure JKN is women-friendly and that
no quality of care disparities emerge for women, irrespective of whether they
pay the insurance fee or is it paid for them by the government.
Only
with the engagement of women, will JKN deliver on its potential to improve
women’s health for all. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar