Health systems abroad: why you can’t reason as you would in France

• Universal public systems funded by taxation (like the Portuguese SNS or, with important nuances, the British NHS): access is in principle open to any legal resident, including foreigners, but full affiliation often takes time administratively.
• Federal or provincial systems (Canada, to some extent the United States): rules vary from one state or province to another, even within the same country — see the Canada page.
• Systems where a foreign resident has no access to the public scheme (as in Thailand): access to care runs almost exclusively through the private sector, at rates with no relation to public rates — see the Thailand page.

Some countries require health insurance for every resident, including foreigners, on pain of administrative or financial penalties (this is the case in the United Arab Emirates, where the requirement even varies from one emirate to another — see the United Arab Emirates page). Other countries impose nothing legally on an EU citizen, cover remaining a matter of personal choice — this is the case for a French national in Portugal. There is no single rule: each country page documents the actual requirement, country by country.

The local health system determines whether insurance is there to fill a total gap in access (no accessible public scheme), to reduce a high out-of-pocket cost (public scheme exists but isn’t generous), or to speed up access to quality care (public scheme accessible but with waiting times). These three needs aren’t covered the same way — see the guide Understanding international health insurance. And to gauge the actual price gap behind each of these systems, see the cost of healthcare country by country.