Module 4: Argument Plan - Rhetorical Considerations

Step 1:

Problem and Its Presence: In our community, the problem of limited access to quality doctors who accept Medi-Cal insurance persists, posing a significant barrier to equitable healthcare. This issue is serious because it directly affects the well-being of Medi-Cal beneficiaries, who often struggle to find healthcare providers willing to accept their insurance. As a result, these individuals face challenges in accessing timely and comprehensive medical treatment, leading to potential exacerbation of health disparities and overall poorer health outcomes.

Target Audience: The intended audience for this proposal is the California State Legislature, particularly the members of the Health Committee. These decision-makers possess the authority and financial resources necessary to implement policy changes and allocate funds to address the identified problem effectively. They are committed to improving public health and have a vested interest in ensuring that all Californians have access to quality healthcare services, regardless of their insurance status.

Genre: A memo is more suitable for this rhetorical purpose and audience. As members of the Health Committee are busy individuals with numerous responsibilities, a concise and formal memo format allows for clear communication of the issue, proposed solution, and supporting evidence without overwhelming them with unnecessary details.

Step 2:

Alternative Solutions and Drawbacks:

1. Increasing Awareness Campaigns: While raising awareness about available Medi-Cal providers is important, it may not directly address the root cause of the problem, which includes low reimbursement rates and administrative burdens.

2. Incentivizing Private Providers: Offering financial incentives to private providers to accept Medi-Cal patients may temporarily increase access but could be financially unsustainable in the long run and may not address systemic issues.

The Best Solution:

The proposed solution is to implement a comprehensive healthcare reform package focused on three main pillars: increasing reimbursement rates, streamlining administrative processes, and integrating telehealth services within the Medi-Cal program. This solution is logical and feasible as it directly tackles the primary barriers identified in accessing quality healthcare for Medi-Cal beneficiaries.

Justification for the Best Solution:

1. Improved Provider Participation: By increasing reimbursement rates, more healthcare providers will be incentivized to accept Medi-Cal patients, thereby expanding the provider network and improving access to care. Evidence from Kominski et al. (2017) supports this, highlighting the correlation between low reimbursement rates and provider scarcity.

2. Enhanced Efficiency: Streamlining administrative processes will reduce bureaucratic burdens for providers, making participation in the program more attractive. Sommers et al. (2017) provide qualitative insights into the impact of administrative obstacles on access to care, supporting the need for simplification.

3. Geographical Accessibility: Integrating telehealth services will overcome geographical constraints, particularly in rural or underdeveloped areas, and increase access to care for Medi-Cal beneficiaries. While not directly addressed in the selected sources, evidence from broader literature supports the efficacy of telehealth in improving healthcare access, especially for marginalized groups.

Counter-Arguments and Rebuttal:

1. Concern: Financial Feasibility: Skeptics may argue that increasing reimbursement rates and implementing telehealth services are financially unsustainable. Response: Evidence from cost-benefit analyses and successful implementations in other states can be presented to demonstrate the long-term economic benefits of improving access to healthcare for Medi-Cal beneficiaries.

2. Concern: Resistance from Providers: Critics may claim that providers will resist changes to administrative processes. Response: Evidence of successful administrative reforms in other healthcare programs and testimonials from providers who have benefited from streamlined processes can be provided to address this concern.

Concluding Call to Action:

The memo will conclude with a strong call to action urging members of the Health Committee to support and advocate for the proposed healthcare reform package. Rhetorical strategies such as appealing to their commitment to public health, emphasizing the potential positive impact on constituents, and highlighting the urgency of addressing healthcare disparities will be employed to persuade them to take action.

Step 3:

The California State Legislature should implement a comprehensive healthcare reform package, including increasing reimbursement rates, streamlining administrative processes, and integrating telehealth services within the Medi-Cal program, to address the critical issue of limited access to quality healthcare for Medi-Cal beneficiaries. This solution is justified by evidence showing its potential to improve provider participation, enhance efficiency, and overcome geographical barriers to access, ultimately leading to better health outcomes for all Californians.

Step 4:

An Advocacy Ad targeting California residents will complement the proposal by raising awareness of the issue and garnering public support for the proposed healthcare reform package. The ad will highlight personal stories of individuals who have struggled to access quality healthcare due to limitations with Medi-Cal insurance and emphasize the importance of taking action to address this pressing issue. By mobilizing public support, the ad will exert pressure on decision-makers to prioritize and enact the proposed reforms.

References:

Gabel, J., Whitmore, H., & Kamil, J. (2020). Medi-Cal Provider Networks: Challenges and Opportunities for Expansion. Health Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.01227

Kominski, G. F., Roby, D. H., Liao, X., & Melnikow, J. (2017). California's Role In Medi-Cal's Rapid Growth And Promising Practices For The Future. Health Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0545

Sommers, B. D., Maylone, B., Nguyen, K. H., Blendon, R. J., & Epstein, A. M. (2017). The Impact of State Policies on ACA Applications and Enrollment Among Low-income Adults in Arkansas, Kentucky, and Texas. Health Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1242

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step 1: Reflect on Research as a Recursive or Reiterative Process

The research process has been broken down so far, allowing you to conduct research related to your community problem first and then your proposed solution. Briefly reflect on research as a recursive or reiterative process in this way:

1. How did it affect your writing process? What did you learn along the way? What challenges did you encounter? How did you resolve them?
2. What skills or practices might you take away from research in this way to transfer it to other writing situations?

Step 2: Conduct Supplementary Research

To make a persuasive argument in support of your solution proposal, you need to address any gaps in your existing research, providing ample supporting evidence. You need to also consider your audience's possible objections and concerns, and research them to respond to them effectively.

1. What areas related to your proposed solution and justifying reasons might benefit from further research? Provide 1-2 additional sources to enhance this aspect of your argument, with a brief explanation of your selections. Document the sources in APA style as they would appear in the References list.
2. To come across as a logical, ethical arguer, the audience's counterarguments should be reflected accurately and responded to with evidence. Provide 1-2 additional sources to enhance this aspect of your argument, with a brief explanation of your selections. For example, think about possible rebuttals and what sources you would use for refuting those counter-arguments. Document them in APA style as they would appear in the References list.

Submission Requirements

• At least 500 words that fully answer all questions in the two steps. Address each step separately.