Question

1 Describe the legislative process and how a bill becomes law

2 Describe how policy is formulated through the Judicial System. Include in your discussion the concept of case law and precedent and how this relates to the health policy.

3 What are advantages and disadvantages of these processes in regard to their effect on health policy?

Answer 1

1. The legislative process is a formal proposal of new regulations in the form of a bill which is presented in the representative bodies of the nation. These can be known as the House or the Parliament of the country.

For a bill to become a law, a body of lawmakers is engaged in introducing the bill in the Senate or the defined Parliament House. The house has comparatively higher responsibility of taking note of these bills and represent the country's population. A series of public hearings are made to the proposed legislations and are debated upon by both the agreeing or non-agreeing sides.  After these hearings, the head of the chamber in which the bill had been introduced, forwards the final amendment voted in favour to the President for final approval and authoritative signature. Thereafter, the bill is known as a law in the legislation.

2. In the judicial system, a group of policymakers introduce different suitable suggestions and initiate different approaches required for the fulfilment of the solutions to problems which the population of that nation are facing during that period of time. These multiple paths to make changes in the policy are often necessary to make vital changes to the policy. In context to health policy, when a law is discussed in the legislation, the judicial system can interpret the law making body and suggest additions to the amendments using the judicial powers given in the constitution of that nation. This leads to making necessary changes to the health policy and major health concerns revolving around the bill to be passed in the Parliament.

3. Advantage: The Judicial interpretation helps in fulfilling the gap that the House lacks in context to the current situation of the nation and the previous experiences that have led to overruling of the proposed changes in the policy under a restricted order.

Disadvantage: When the judiciary interprets the legislation in context to the health law/policy , a common conclusion to the final amendment is commonly observed. The appropriate conditions of the policy for the House/Parliament is bound by the sovereignty of the people. Whereas the judicial system's involvement in the interpretation can lead to major changes in the law which are not bound in the favour of the law proposed.