ABSTRACT
The Colombian healthcare crisis is evidenced by obstacles to health service, diminished working conditions and medical autonomy, financial infeasibility, loss of leadership and legitimacy of the healthcare system. In the year 2013 twelve reform projects were presented to Congress, including a statutory law that defines health as a fundamental right which was approved and another ordinary one which sought a complete reform of the system but was rejected and criticized by different opinion leaders. For this study we have made an adaptation to Q methodology, which assigns quantitative values to the most frequent statement variables obtained from secondary sources (norms, articles, media, forums) giving objective information about the diverse positions in the proposals to healthcare reform. We analyzed from the most objective position and from academic independence the different views of the opinion leaders for a better understanding of the reasons for this failure in healthcare reform. There was a great polarization in the diverse statements which made an agreement with the government unlikely and, when added to a political moment in which the presidential election was being held, made the new reform non-viable. Although there is an agreement about the existence of a crisis, this has not been the case about the analysis of its causes or solutions. At the present time, the government is not presenting a new reform proposal and is focusing on some decree to create a model of healthcare in rural zones, define financial conditions for the EPSes (health providers), update norms for membership in a healthcare system and regulate biotechnological drugs. Even though to date there have been no opinions, plus taking into account the previous analysis, it is very possible there will be much criticism from those who demand a structural change in the system.