The focus of this paper will be on how health care systems in three countries, Malaysia, South Africa and the United States, are responding to the health needs of immigrants with a strong focus on the legal aspects of the respective national responses. The Malaysia portion emphasizes legal immigration and analyses as to how the country's Ministry of Health and the delivery system itself is responding to the demands of immigrant's health. In the context of South Africa, the paper explores implications of the South African Constitution, which establishes a right to access health care, and explores whether such a right can be extended to non-citizens, or can be tempered by economic constraints. In the American discussion the focus is on whether publicly supported health care programs can be accessed to provide coverage for undocumented residents, and highlights recent constraints in using government monies in this area.
Three authors describe problematic scenarios of health policy in their respective countries. These examples illustrate the role of government influences in determining resource allocation, legislation, health provision and health outcomes in very different situations. These outcomes are affected not only by attitudes to public health, but also by the legal systems in the countries which are the subjects of this study. The authors draw conclusions about the use and abuse of public health regulation.