Martin Hauge______________

Architectural Portfolio 2013

Name: Martin Hauge Born: 18.12.1987

Adress: Hollendergaten 11 5017 Bergen Norway Email: MRTNHG@gmail.com

Phone: +47 92 82 05 29

Welcome to my portfolio!My name is Martin, and I am born and raised in the west-nor-wegian town Bergen.My mom is from the Philippines while my father was Icelandic.I started working when I was 13 and have become a very in-dependent soul. Somehow this made me appreciate family even more, and when my father got cancer in 2008 I stood by his side and took care of him to the very end of his life. This was while working and studying at the same time.It became a turning point. Me going from a rebel to someone devoted.While studying architecture, I have been working as a wait-er, bartender and barista. When things get intense at school, it is always good to work beside, so that the mind can take its focus somewhere else. The past three years on my way to the Bachelors degree has been wonderful, with a challenging learning environment both physical and mental.And now my attitude towards architecture has changed. I real-ize how little I know compared to all there is to learn about architecture.And my portfolio is hopefully giving an impression of openess and a thirst to experience more.The three first years at BAS, we fokus on drawing architecture by hand, to practice the art. The computer skills are there-fore something we started focusing on late in the studies.

Table of content:

01 Complex building

02 Hospital investigation

03 Climate chamber

04 Wood course

05 Lemstova

06 Room for meeting with the unknown

07 Surviving on an island

# Projects

08 Other works

09 Resumé

#01

ComplexBuildingSemester Spring ´13 (3rd year)Duration On going (10 weeks) Tutors Magnus Waage, Andre Fontes, Andrea Spreafico, Cristian Stefanescu Site Haukeland, Bergen, Norway

Project description:

The project is about working with a building that has a high level of com-plexity. In this case it was Haukeland Hospital. There were no limits to what one could do with the building.

Project solution:

My project was taking out a part of the building, and placing it in two ends.This creates a new atrium in the build-ing that houses a public plaza, with a new circulation and movement. In order to do so, wards has to be reorganized and programs redefined.It all came out from a feeling of fear. The hospital is one of the biggest buildings in Bergen, and it is very com-pact. An immediate need for space and larger variations as well as clear defi-nitions of public and private zones are needed. And this is what the project aim to provide for. As this is on going, theese pages only shows investigations that led to this project.

Conceptual models

1:1 Sketching

Investigating in model

Hospital situation on shopping-mall

Investigating situation

FIGURING OUT THE SYSTEMS

-

terminology:Patient: One who receives medical attention, care, or treatment.

Coverage/Access : Degree of whoever can a�ord or achieve accommodating/necessary healthcare services

Health care : The prevention, treatment, and management of illness and the preservation of mental and physical well-being through the services o�ered by the medical and allied health professions.

The organization of the Norwegian health care system is built around the principle that everyone should have the same access to health care, regardless of socio-economic position and geographic residence.

It is a stated health policy goals that health care should be equal with regards to the availability, use and results.

All public hospitals are owned by the State through its four regional health authorities.

In the public health system, there are three types of hospitals, local hospi-tals, central hospitals and regional hospitals. All Norwegian regional hospi-tals are also teaching hospitals.

In addition to the public ther are also a number of private hospitals, which also has extensiv contracts with the regional health authorities for reimbursement for medical treatment.

The system “free choice” means that patients today are free to choose to be treated at any local hospital or private hospital.

Norway

Work Tax

Government

Services

Healthcare

Citizens

100 %

Work Tax

Government

Services

Healthcare

Private Insurances

Payments

Citizens

84 %

Flip System/SuggestionIt turns out both systems have distinct pros and cons, what is the balance needed for the optimal health care system? What if we swap systems for a while?Would it get the US health system back on track?Would it enhance the quality of Norwegian health services?

This research attempts to display the scale and dynamics of the phenomenon of the hospital at the intersection of the public and private sectors. On one hand, the hospital plays a key role in the delivery of public welfare and its operation as a public institution; and on the other hand, the hospital’s role as large private entities in the medical-industrial complex.

Intentionally the main aim of the investigation was to expose important aspects and comparisons of the political economy of the contemporary hospital: Investigating Norway and the United States.

An understanding of how both countries approach public welfare and how it a�ected the current health care systems was incorporated in the research. It compares the two di�erent systems through recorded statistics and current discussions, with an emphasis on the variation found in government and private health care spending.

What we tried was to not be held by the common pre-concep-tions found in each distinct continent and attempt to be as objective as possible. As the current prevalent discourse of inter-pretations do not always apply to each other and can easily lead into pretense.

Explanation/TheoryThe reason of such paradoxical results is quite unclear. What is it patients seek after most? Does the paradox lie in the di�ering models as one group is treated as a citizen and the other as a customer?

For Norwegians who are serviced as a citizen, maybe the main national interest of politicians is to cover as many as possible with lowest costs. Simply most bang for the buck. But this often leaves the patient with cheap-er treatment and several compromises—not necessarily the best of the best. As for the US health system, there is no singular universal system. The system is read di�erently depending on who is reading. The citizen that can a�ord proper treatment can pay the needed price for the highest quality treatment, what they �nd as the ‘best’. Possibly this explains the lower ratio of malpractice found in the US.

Most hospitals in the US do not have the issue of long queues as found in other western countries. But this may be due to the other battle in the US as a large �gure of Americans cannot a�ord any health insurance, or that a large percentage has poor insurance plans. Few are waiting in queues for the care they need, which is true but it does not mean Americans are getting service quicker—the numbers show a quarter of Americans are not getting service at all.

Jonas Gahr Støre

Norwegian minister of health Jonas Gahr Støre (Ap / Labour Party) does not worry that an increasing group of people choose to pay for health services out of own pocket.

“We have more money to play with nowadays, and therefore it is naturally resulting in more individual spendings on healthcare services. This we cannot let be indignated morally by,” states Støre.

So far the private insurance only applies minor of the population.

In consideration health insurances cover 0,14 % of the total health care expenses in Norway. The Norwegian public coverage of insurance is undoubtedly by far the superior insurance in terms of receiving proper accommodating treatment.

Støre Claims the Norwegian treatment is one of the best you can possible get in the world.

Social-Democratic state - RegimePromote an equality of the highest standards, not an equality of minimal needs (as pursued elsewhere)

sevices and bene�ts be upgraded to levels of middle class, equality be furnished by guaranteeing workers full participation in the quality of the rights enjoyed by the better-o�

Liberal - state - Regimemeans-tested assistancemodest universal transfers,modest social insurance plans

The US has no compulsory national health insurance.

Most Americans are insured through their employer who pays most of the income for health insurance in the US.

In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson`s act created the public health insur-ance Medicare and Medicaid. Medicare partially covers health spending for the elderly.

State Children`s Health insurance Program (SCHIP) was formed in 1997. Medicaid and (SCHIP) covers the cost of healthcare and medicines for low-income families and individuals.

US medical research has long been the forefront in medical research and development of new treatments.

United StatesAppearance/Pre-conceptionAs most of us at least have a brief understanding of the current situation of both the US and the Norwegian health systems, you could from a Norwegian perspective easily rush into the prevailing and exaggerated conclusion that in relation of the two models, that the Norwegian model is by far the superior. Apparently, most of us have already set the parameters of our understanding.

Today, the US health care system by many is considered as one of the worst health systems in the western world, in terms of access, coverage and expenses. For a vast portion of the US population, the only insurance alternative a�ord-able, if a�ordable at all, is the present public Medicare or Medicaid, which unfortunately is far from accommodating su�cient coverage due to high costs and di�cult conditions. Rough estimations claim as much as 30 percent of the money -�ow within the system act ually ends up in the pockets of lawyers and other paper push-ers. So what happened to what we once regarded as the very best health system in the 1960s? The system based on the free-market strategy, in order to hold incentives for a healthy competition in favor of the citizens. Over time, the healthy competition became unbalanced, turning insurance companies into vanquishers of common assets, leaving a larger amount of people excluded from hospital care. In recent years, President Obama has pushed to reassem-ble the current system to cover those who have been left excluded.

Anyhow, back to the abstract, if we take a look at the Norwegian system, what are the current issues found there? Norwegians have full access to public hospitals through equal coverage funded by the state budget. But on the other hand, even with the accessibility—the queues are so delayed that they leave the average Norwegian waiting for three months. The general driving incentives for typical physicians in Norway and the US vary with the di�ering salary system. Maybe this explains the amount of maltreatment in Scandinavia, which approximately has 300 % more malpractice than the US. Also unlike in Norway, a common rating system of doctors is present in America. This indeed seems to alter the perception of which system is the better functioning health care model.

Norway / Average wait time

children /Allergy study

Inguinal hernia Assessment of heart murmur

adults /Cardiac exam

Vascular surgery (narrow blood vessels)Removal of Ovarian CystsAndropause, assessment

Incontinence, womanFoot surgery (Heel and forefoot )

Hip osteoarthritis (Prosthetic)weeks 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

United States / Accessibility to health care

0 25 50 75 100

children + adults /No access Has access

percentage

Merge System/SuggestionWhat if we merge the two systems?

When the House of Representatives passed the legislation with a 219 to 212 vote, Obama said, "What this day represents is another stone �rmly laid in the foundation of the American dream…We answered the call of history as so many generations of Americans have before us.”

“After a century of striving, after a year of debate, after a historic vote, health care reform is no longer an unmet promise. It is the law of the land.”

President Barak Obama

#02

HospitalInvestigationSemester Spring ´13 (3rd year)Duration 5 weeks Tutors Dean Simpson, Magnus Waage, Andrea Spreafico, Cristian Stefanescu Site Norway & USA Group-work

Project description:

The group was given the task to compare healtcare-systems and try to dissect it, by looking at the conditions the healt-care-systems are given.That means political systems, ideals, finance, quality and so on.

Project solution:

By reading and finding statistics we got a view over the world. Then we went fur-ther into comparing Norway and USA. With what we found, we developed our skills in presenting our material on four A1-boards graphically (as shown on the pag-es). This we did by using indesign and illustrator.This project was connected to under-standing the context of architecture and the typologies.In the end it gave us new tools for de-veloping our bachelorproject, both in skills and understanding of the com-plexity beside the physical elements.

(DIS)COVERAGE

Density of residents insured by Employer

low high

Enrolled in Medicaid - state funded

low high

Insured

76%- 83% 83 -86% 86%-89% 89%-96%

A public hospital is owned by a government and receives govern-ment funding. This type of hospital provides medical care free of charge, as the funding the hospital receives covers the costs.In the United States, public hospi-tals receive signi�cant funding from local, state, and/or federal governments. In Norway, all public hospitals are funded from the national budget and run by four Regional Health Authorities (RHA) owned by the Ministry of Health and Care Services.

PUBLIC

Hospital Catalog / United States

Norway

1. Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, Florida2. Erie County Medical Center, Bu�alo, New York3. San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California4. University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Irvine, California5. Boston Medical Center, Boston Massachusetts6. Orlando Health, Orlando, Florida7. Nashville General Hospital at Meharry, Nashville, Tennessee8. NYC HHc-Harlem Hospital center, Harlem, New York9. Mount Sinai Hospital at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois10. Alameda County Medical Center, Oakland, California

1 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

1. Sykehuset Innlandet, Hamar2. Sykehuset Innlandet, Lillehammer 3. Ringerike sykehus, Hønefoss 4. Glittreklinikken, Hakadal5. Rjukan sykehus, Rjukan6. Sykehuset Innlandet, Gjøvik7. Sykehuset Innlandet, Elverum8. Sunnaas sykehus, Nesoddtangen 9. Akershus universitetssykehus, Akerhus10. Sykehuset Telemark, Skien

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

1. Diakonhjemmet Sykehus. Oslo2. Lovisenberg diakonale sykehus, Oslo3. Martina Hansens Hospital, Skien4. Feiringklinikken, Feiring5. Glittreklinikken, Hakadal6. Revmatismesykehuset, Lillehammer7. Betanien Hospital, Skien8. Haraldsplass diakonale sykehus, Bergen9. Haugesund Sanitetsforenings Revmatismesykehus, Haugesund10. Haugesund Sanitetsforenings Revmatismesykehus, Haugeusnd

1. Aleris Sykehus, Trondheim2. Aleris Sykehus, Trondheim3. Nimi Sykehus, Ekberg4. Nimi Sykehus, Ullevål5. Nimi Sykehus, Oslo6. Ringvollklinikken Hobøl Ringvollklinikken , Oslo7. Teres Colosseum, Oslo8. Teres Nobel, Oslo9. Volvat Bergen, Bergen10.Privat Sykehuset Haugesund, Haugesund

N/A

N/A

N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A

PRIVATE FOR PROFIT

For-pro�t hospitals, or alternatively investor-owned hospitals are hospitals, which have been estab-lished particularly in the United States during the late twentieth century. In contrast to the traditional and more common non-pro�t hospitals, they attempt to garner a pro�t for their share-holders.

The three largest �rms in the United States are Hospital Corpo-ration of America, Tenet (formerly NME), and HealthSouth.

1. Edinburg Regional Medical Center, Edinburg, Texas 2. Henrico Doctors’ Hospital-Forest Campus, Richmond, Virginia3. St. Marks Hospital Salt Lake City, Utah4. Eisenhower Medical Center, Rancho Mirage, California5. Baptist Medical Center, San Antonio, Texas6. Pali Momi Medical Center, Aiea, Hawaii7. Ponca City Medical Center, Ponca City, Oklahoma8. Bronson Battle Creek Hospital, Battle Creek, Michigan9. Alaska Regional Hospital, Anchorage, Alaska10.Louis A Weiss Memorial Hospital, Chicago, Illinois

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10.

N/AN/A N/A

PRIVATENON-PROFIT

A private non-pro�t hospital is owned by a non-pro�t organisa-tion and privately funded through payment for medical services by patients themselves, by insurers, or by foreign embassies. This practice is very common in the United States, France and Australia. In the United Kingdom, private hospitals are distinguished from the far more prevalent National Health Service institutions.

1. Ascension Health, St. Louis, Missouri2. Catholic Health Initiatives, Denver, Colorado3. Mayo Clinic - St Marys Hospital, Rochester, Minnesota 4. Cleveland Clinic Cleveland, Ohio5. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California6. The Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas7. Tampa General Hospital Tampa, Florida8. UPMC Hamot, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania9. Payson Regional Medical Center, Payson, Arizona10. American Fork Hospital, American Fork, Utah

1 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

N/A N/A

The rating is an unbiased score (out of 100) that incorporates expert ratings by US News and Thomson Reuters as well as a quantitative rating based on Medicare data. This data is related to patient experience, care outcome, sta� communication, and the number of cases performed for the most common procedures.

State funded

low high

Insured

Percentage of residents with private insurance

low high

1 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10.

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

100%

Number of Hospitals in Percentage (%/whole)

Public 64%

Private Non-Pro�t 8%

Private For-Pro�t 28%

Number of Hospitals in Percentage (%/whole)

Public 24%

Private Non-Pro�t 59%

Private For-Pro�t 17%

CURRENT

The only thing we can say with certainty is that it’s much related to the interaction reform. But the trend following systematically in one direction or the other, we know not.

Olav Valen Slåttebrekk, Helsedirektoratet

On Norwegian interaction reform

Let me get this straight . . .

We’re going to be “gifted” with a health care plan we are forced to

ten million more people without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it, passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a Dumbo President who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes, for which we’ll be taxed

which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to

country that’s broke!!!!!

‘What the hell could possibly go wrong?’

Donald Trump

-

Quotes:

“Because of the mandate, Americans will be forced to pay for a system that will increase costs for patients, remove health care decisions from both the doctor and the patient and lead to rationing. It changes health care as we know it

conveyor belt socialized medicine”

Dr. Elaina George of the Project 21 African-American Conservative Leadership Network

On Obama healthcare

-

-ment system.

A greater focus on quality in health care is needed. Today health

too little on quality. Norway is one of the countries in Europe that have the least developed quality management system for healthcare. . . media coverage of error handling, and systems that do not work emphasizes the need for a comprehensive quality manage

Erna Solberg, Leader, Høyre

-

In Medicare, what we did was we said, we are going to have to bring down the costs if we’re going to deal with our long-term

going. $716 billion we were able to save from the Medicare program by no longer overpaying insurance companies by making sure that we weren’t overpaying providers. And using that money, we were actually able to lower prescription drug costs for seniors by an average of $600, and we were also able

ventive care that will ultimately save money throughout the system.

President Obama

I fully respect that we should be critical of the Norwegian health care system, but we must beware not to speak bad of the Norwegian health care system and the formidable job tens of thousands of employees there do every single day, and the results delivered there.

Jens Stoltenberg, Norwegian Prime minister

1,2%POPULATION

GROWTH 0,8%0,9%

WORLD

23,7‰BIRTH RATE

NOR

12,4‰

USA

13,9‰

STILLBIRTH RATE 8,4‰ 8,5‰8,1‰

AVERAGE AGE 29 3937

27% 19%20%

11% 21%18%

AGEDUNDER 15 YRS

15-

AGEDOVER 60 YRS

60+

N/A 6335 $3795 $

N/A 1198 $4165 $

GOVERNMENT HEALTHEXPENSES

/PER CAPITA / YEAR

PRIVATE HEALTHEXPENSES

/PER CAPITA / YEAR

+

TOTAL HEALTHEXPENSES

/PER CAPITA / YEAR N/A 7533 $7960 $

WORLD NORUSA

N/A 84,1%47,7%

GOVERNMENT COSTSOF TOTAL HEALTH

EXPENSES

PRIVATE COSTS OF TOTAL

HEALTH EXPENSES N/A 15,9%52,3%

NATIONAL SPENDINGHEALTH CARE N/A 13,8%22,3%

URBAN LIVING 50% 79%82%

NATIONAL SPENDING/ BILLIONS N/A 183,2$3795,6 $

NATIONAL SPENDINGHEALTH CARE

/ BILLIONS N/A 25,34 $846,1 $

N/AAVERAGE

DEATH AGE 8179

N/AAVERAGE

DEATH AGE FEMALE 8381

N/AAVERAGE

DEATH AGE MALE 7976

MALE SCHOOLCOVERAGE 91% 99%95%

FEMALE SCHOOLCOVERAGE 89%

CELLULAR SUBSCRIBER/ PER PERSON 78% 116%90%

10822 $GROSS

AVERAGE INCOME 56830 $47360 $

573 363418

230 2734

99%96%

$

DEATH RATE BY NONCOMMUNICABLE

DISEASE PER 100000 / YEAR

DEATH RATE BY COMMUNICABLE

DISEASE PER 100000 / YEAR

POPULATION/ MILLIONS

NOR: 5,1

USA: 316

WORLD: 7100

WORLD HEALTH STATISTICS 2012 WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (WHO)

The World Heath Statistics printed by the World Health Organi-zation (WHO)opens in its initial pages stating the two recent World Health Assembly (WHA) resolutions. The statements highlight the importance of health-�nancing systems in help-ing countries attain and maintain universal coverage—some-times called “universal health coverage or “social health protection”. Universal coverage has been de�ned as: Ensuring that all people have access to needed health services—prevention, promotion, treatment and rehabilita-tion—without facing �nancial ruin because of the need to pay for them. The WHA states that countries lacking universal coverage have several options for immediate action including:

Raising more funds for health domestically;

Reducing �nancial barriers to services by increasing forms of prepayment and the pooling of funds, rather than relying

on direct out-of-pocket payments;

Improving e�ciency and equity in the way resources are used.

The World Health Statistics asks the question of how much money is available for health? The report states the overall level of funding allocated to health sets the boundaries that determine which services will be available to the population. The overall level is determined partly by a country’s wealth, the in�ow of funds for health from external partners, and the proportion of national income devoted to health.

The statistics show the main di�erences between the United States and Norway are found in the amount of the nation’s spending both generally and speci�c to health care. And in accordance to WHO, these numbers are likely a re�ection of the two country’s wealth. The United States and Norway have similar statistics in its percentage of population growth, birth rates and percentage of residents living in urban areas, but in the areas of spending the numbers vary by double, triple, and in some cases in even larger di�erences. These di�erences lie both at the national level and at the individual level.

In comparing the two countries health care system in general, a focus can be put on the American Private Hospital System and the Norwegian State Hospital System. Considering the United States’ government costs of total health expenses aver-aged out at 47,7% where are Norway’s average was 84,1% shows the large di�erence in state funded services provided in the two countries—a re�ection of their di�erent approach to health care administered by the two governments.

Top Five Hosptials

according to Patient Satisfaction

Bottom Five Hosptials

according toPatient Satisfaction

NorwayUnited States

1 2

3

4

5

1

2

43

512

3 45

2

14

3 5

1

5

4

2

FeiringklinikkenFeiring Akerhus

GlittreklinikkenHaladal, Akershus

Nord�ord SjukehusNord�ordeid, Sogn og Fjordane

Revmatismesykehuset LillehammerLillehammer, Oppland

Sykehuset InnlandtynsetTynset, Hedmark

1

2

3

4

5

Billings ClinicBillings, Montana

Saint Claire’s HospitalWeston, Wisconsin

Alton Memorial HospitalAlton, Illinois

Central Vermont Medical CenterMontpelier, Vermont

Kadlec Medical CenterRichland, Washington

4

2

5

3

1 Nordlandssykehuset Vesterålen Stormarknes, Nordland

Akershus Universitetssykehus Lørenskog, Akershus

Stavanger Universitetssykehus Stavanger, Rogaland

Nordlandssykehuset Bodø Bodø, Nordland

OUS Aker Oslo, Oslo

4

5

3

1 Harlem Hospital Center New York, New York

Lake Regional Health System Osage Beach, Missouri

Kings County Hospital Center New York, New York

Our Lady of the Resurrection Chicago, Illinois

Kimball Medical Center Lakewood, New Jersey

Today there is no universal health insurance coverage in the US, and therefore one of the main focuses in US health care is getting every citizen and resident medically covered. This was the main initiative of the Patient Protection and A�ordable Care Act. The plan focuses on cutting costs of insurance plans making it purchasable and a�ordable for all. It also claims that businesses with over 50 employees are committed to pay insurance for their employees or a �ne will be given for not doing so. The big discussion of this revolutionizing plan is about how it a�ects the citizens in their personal economy. People in general are afraid insurance costs for a family will be at a minimum of 20k $ each year.

The insurance coverage in Norway is hundred percent for citizens and residents. In other words the economical concern of being sick in Norway is small, considering there is practically no worry for hospital and physician visit fees. The coverage includes, medi-cal treatments, international medical treatments, sick pay and in some cases spa treatments. It is a rather di�erent health care system compared to the rest of the world.

Regardless of such coverage and bene�ts, people have large complaints about the long waiting times, an issue that has been discussed for years. “The average wait for a hip replacement is more than four months. Approximately 23 percent of all patients referred for hospital admission have to wait longer than three months for admission. Also, care can be denied if it is not deemed to be cost-e�ective.” Jason Shafrin, The Economist Three other major Norwegian Healthcare topics:

1. Improper treatmentIn some cases improper treatment led to invalid diagnosis, and in worst-case scenarios, it has led to death. 2. UnderemploymentThe number of doctors and nurses in Norwegian hospitals is apparently too low, and is continually discussed between politi-cians on how to handle this issue. 3. Centralization of hospitals.Functions are taken away from local hospitals so that the major hospitals can be more specialized in such functions. The concern for this is both on part of the person(s) living in suburban and non-suburban areas having to travel longer to hospitals and the insecurity of at-hand emergency treatments increases.

Not Entirely Covered

Not Proper

The ratings show the top �ve and bottom �ve rated hospi-tals in the United States and Norway according to patient satisfaction. The facades of the hospital are shown along with a basic hospital plan [di�eren-tiating between public and private hospitals, marked aswhite for public and grey for private]

Patient Satisfaction:

Notice:Eight out of the top ten hospitals rated are private

Seven out of the bottom ten hospitals rated are public

2

PERSONAL PERSPECTIVESBergen, Norway

InjuredPatient

General Physician

Private

PublicState funds

Out-of-pocket

Citizen

Customer

You could make a habit of not undressing before going to sleep. It can work for some time. Also staying awake for more than 24 hours between each time you sleep so you do not have to deal with the issue as often. Even though you through the last strategy are getting several small incidents of seizures as you get tired. A more safely approach is to consume large amounts of alcohol before trying to go to sleep, so your body is just happily ignoring all signals from your actual physical state, making you think everything is perfect. Since in our modern generic stigmatic and e�cient society and mindset this obviously not can go on forever, as the itching appar-ently can, you should also try to ask you doctor for assistance. However, even though your doctor proba-bly is not an total imbecile, it can after a few months turn out that he is not getting anywhere with any cure. And that is when you �nally get forwarded to a �eld-ex-pert… were the queue is something like 8 months. Well, at this point, you can get a bit frustrat-ed, and/or you contact a private clinic with a private �eld-expert. Were you for an appointment you have to wait approxi-mately until the next day. Considering the high/low fees, compared to public service, roughly just above1000,- NOK. Or maybe 1800,- NOK?, anyhow, the bang for the buck is simply tremendously. And since you as a private customer are getting “best friends” with this doctor right away, who totally accidentally got a position in the same �eld at the local public-hospital, you get to visit the public hospital for an examination the very next day after that. He simply helps you out in

his own lunchtime so he won´t interfere with any other queued public patients. Such a contributing soul some private doctors got! Although this is not the case for all, nor all conditions, patients in Norway can skip months of long public queues by interact-ing with private doctors with a position in a public clinic as well. Not actually because they have a private position, which is theoretically irrelevant, but is in reality the very way those extra services can and are indeed provided. Whether this is fair or not is unclear, it is certainly far from convincing. You can argue that it will simply bene�t both the public queue, which is slightly shrinking, and the very patient that is consulted straight away. On the other hand the selec-tion require a small premium leaving some portion of the population excluded. Dubi-ously ensued by the seemingly randomized accessibility. Nevertheless, the explicit potential exploit of making money by o�ering subsequently implied well-nigh free and instant public services is indisputably doubtful. Not to accuse this particular private physicians of doing so intentionally. With the relatively small fee involved in this example it is less likely the motivation. On the contrary it is a profoundly unfair distribution, no matter how much it would be based on sheer contribution, paradoxi-cally not interrupting any others. As compared to France it is illegal for physi-cians to have position in both the public and private sectors, not to say there would, or could be other ways to avail the exploita-tion.

You work in a privately owned medical center. It has only egg-white walls, and you stare at them from Monday to Friday as you �le medical charts of all sorts for �ve days in a row. You rarely speak to the doctor you work for and you hear every-thing second-hand through the doctor’s secretary. So your conversations are held primarily between you, the secretary and the two other �ling clerks. The o�ce is a quiet area and hours pass from drinking co�ee and moving paper from one folder to another and onto a shelf.

Now, Tuesdays and Thursdays are di�er-ent. Not every Tuesday and Thursday, but a good majority of them. After one o’clock you and everyone else frequents the break room much more often than per se Wednesdays and you hear much more talk on both �oors of the o�ce. And this is because in that hour comes a smiling pharmaceutical representative who is determined, content and greeting with goodies. The hands of the representatives are never empty when they walk in and the break-room is much more popular after their visit. Fully catered meals and the casual dessert is carried in along with boxes of pens and paper pads in all sizes with name of anti-depressants, allergy medicines, and so on. Everyone in the o�ce becomes the person taking messag-es on notepads decorated with something odd like the name of a hormone-balanc-ing supplement.

What you recall is the energy in the o�ce on these visiting days. Everyone including you is slightly more upbeat. It does help—a warm lunch and chocolate every twenty -�ve minutes. It is almost rather humorous how each and every pharma-ceutical representative you meet is so extravagant in their gestures to make a

good impression. It is reasonable; they are selling a product, as is any other salesper-son. That is more so the odd factor, when you realize medicine is advertised and sold like anything else and �rst and foremost to your doctor. If anyone was to be accounted for to make a more quali�ed decision it is a doctor, but you realize there are more factors then the mere list of ingredients and side e�ects.

Each year pharmaceutical companies use billions of dollars on marketing. And you believe these numbers, and you know they are out there selling because even you as a non-allergic �ling clerk have a personal relation to this particular market-ing. It has made you opinionative and more excited for one allergy pill over the other, even though you will never use it. The advertising is not just on screens and on paper but it has a smell. It has the smell of tacos and chocolate cake that made you choose one pill over the other.

MondayWednesday

Friday Break room - quiet

You

?

Tuesday Thursday

Pharmaceutical Representative

You

Break room - active

You

Los Angeles, United States

It started with a small pain in the left heel, you did not think much of it at that time, but you went to your general practitioner, and he told you to keep still a few months. After two months, your heel was �ne and back to normal. If the case had been that you did go to your general practitioner, this would have been your story. But instead, your story goes like this:You had a small pain in your left heel; you did not think much of it so you did not do anything about it. Well after about two years the pain intensi�ed that you could not run, and also had problems walking. You went to your general practitioner just to hear that you apparently had a chronic in�ammation. Two more years pass, as you go back and forth from doctor to doctor, both public and private, and its clear that the knowl-edge level and cost of visit is di�erent. Private hospitals often have the special-ists but are also extremely expensive. Now it is four years and you are with your new general practitioner. The medical center is located on the ground �oor of a new apartment build-ing. The waiting room is small, with many chairs and clean walls. After four years with little or no improvement, it is not particularly pleasing being in this room. Almost all the chairs are taken and you have to squeeze yourself into a corner. And the reception is in a separate room. People around you are coughing and reading magazines, it's uncomfortable to sit so close together. After about �fteen minutes you go in to meet your GP. You discuss the injury, and you feel more positive because the GP informs you that Norway has a “free choice” system. Your GP explains to you that this means you can choose which hospital you want to go to. You explain your preference and your GP refers you to a private clinic called "Bergen Surgical Hospital". So you went to your preferred private hospital

and still got governmental funding. You leave your GP after paying a small out-of-pocket fee of 180 kr.

After some weeks you got an appoint-ment at the private hospital. The hospital was easy to �nd, as it is located in the city center with a large grocery store on the �rst �oor. You buy some food and drinks, and then go up to the third �oor where the hospital is located. You go through a large and spacious hall, before coming into the waiting room, it is nice and cozy, and the receptionist sits in the same room. You pay the 300 kr. Out-of-pocket fee and then are asked to wait. The room is large and airy; there are paintings on the walls, �owers by the windows, a large television and complimentary co�ee. There are comfortable chairs and tables, plus it was extra nice to sit in this room since you had some food and knew you soon will speak with a specialist. After 15 minutes the doctor comes out. He presents himself as the one who would perform the operation. You go into his o�ce and you notice it is smaller than your GP's o�ce. First you explain your injury, as he understands immediately and then explains what surgery he will perform. He takes his time to answer your questions with good understandable answers. You feel taken cared of and are satis�ed with the visit.

The ‘Free choice’ states that a patient is referred for evaluation / investigation / specialist treatment and has the right to choose the hospital / treatment center. The right to free choice applies to all public hospitals and community health centers owned by a regional health and hospitals that has a contract with a regional health authority.

Klepp, NorwayBergen, Norway

InjuredPatient

General Physician

Private

PublicState funds

Out-of-pocket

Citizen

Customer

Say you fall and hit your head at two in the morning in Lisbon after only being there for only two hours. You are bleeding in pain and shock. Hospital is the place to go.

You grab a taxi, and drive to the hospital in between tiny narrow streets elevating, going down again until you drive through a gate. You are scared and don’t know what to expect. Far away from home and an unknown language scares you more. You don’t know how things work here, but you are soon to �nd out.

Arrived destination, Hospital Sao José. A public hospital. The alternative would be a private hospital where you would receive high quality service and treatment. Since you are not aware of that your travel insur-ance covers this, you don’t think more about it. Besides, it´s only for rich people.

On the other side of the hospital you go o� at an entrance situated at the basement level of the hospital. It’s in a small tunnel. At �rst you enter a white room. There is a security guard watching over us from the other side of a protected glass window.

Open the closed doors and enter a room. It’s big, a bit darker than normal hospitals. The ceiling is low, or maybe it’s the room that’s too big. At your right side, there is a row with desks. Don’t go further in to the room. Just wait until someone at the desk row gives you a sign that it is okay for you to come to him or her. You sit down. They want your personal information. You are getting registered into the hospital.The only ID you have is your driving license from Norway. It works for now and you have to pay 20 Euros in registration fees. What you don’t know is that if you

were a Portuguese citizen the fee would have been half of what you paid. Fortu-nately that is a bagatelle, considering that you get the help you need regardless of citizenship. That is how it works in Portu-gal. The National Health Service covers the entire population.

You are forwarded to your left and then left again until you enter a room with some chairs. Sit down.After �ve minutes a nurse comes in from another door. You follow her in. The room you are entering is small. There´s a desk, two chairs, loads of medical supplies and a big curtain covering an entire side. The nurse doesn´t speak English. You don´t speak Portuguese. She gesticulates trying to show you that she wants to take a blood sample from you. You hate needles but you understand her.

You get a cotton pad taped around your �nger to stop the bleeding and a minute after a doctor enters the room from anoth-er door than the one you came in. It is a young woman.She starts talking to you in English. You´re relieved and explains her what happened. She opens the curtains and a new room is revealed. You walk into the room and lay down. The doctor talks to you, she keeps on asking you about everything while she cuts away you’re hair.

This is going to hurt a bit, she says before she cleans your wound. You lay there, pretending that its all right.

Now, I am going to give you a local anesthesia. Your muscles tie up. You hate needles. The doctor notices that you are tense and tells you to relax. You will hardly feel a thing.

Lisbon, Portugal

NorwegianTourist

Private

Public

TravelInsurance

European HealthInsurance Card

Norwegian Citizenbene�ts

Head injuryNO Grateful

She prepares the needle and tread. The tread is thick, to prevent the wound from tearing up. While she sews your head, she tells you that you have to be aware of the possibility of concussion the next couple of days and that the stiches are being removed in a week.You tell her that you are travelling around in Portugal and follow up with a question about what you should do.The answer is that you can go to any general physician or hospital in the coun-try. Just make sure to bring your papers that you get from this hospital.When you are all done, she tells you that you have to come by with your passport and European health insurance card during the week. Otherwise you will have to pay for full price the treatment, as if you were a non-European.You thank her and walk out the door the doctor came in. You are in a big corridor where you turn right and open another door. Now you are back at the reception.

You realize that it wasn’t so bad at all. Actually it was great. Great sta�, great treatment. You´re safe and sound in a place you don’t know at all.

Norway’s welfare delivery system is built of the community. Everyone helps to pay some-one else's care, and in return they know that they get the same back if something should happen to them. The Norwegian health care system puts less focus on making money (even if this is something that is in the back of their head), and puts more focus on sobri-ety and improvements. The main e�ort is to improve public health and spread knowl-edge about health.Many countries view the Norwegian welfare system to be doped on oil money. This is the general perception of Norway, but this is incorrect. It is the citizen’s willingness to pay taxes that rewards Norwegians with a safe environment at all levels. How well it works is another matter, but at least it is safe. There will always be someone who is looking for an opportunity to take advantage of such a system, but it is perhaps the price one has to pay for a good welfare system. It is the entirety of the system that matters.

Norway as a nation is united in shaping its society. It is clear that there are many opinions and so there are also many disagreements. But all in all, Norway is working towards a common goal. And it is for the betterment for all the people and not for the individual. Norway also donates money to the other parts of the world to improve public health.

The US was built on a similar mindset. It gradually disappeared as money has begun to become more important. Insurance companies, pharmaceutical �rms and lawyers saw their chance to take advantage of the system. They began to raise costs by adding more paperwork, overmedicating, and added other unnecessary treatments and operations. In result, there are large di�erences in treatments and coverage.

Everyone is his or her own fortune; the American dream still lives strong today. It lives especially strong in the conservative parts of the US.People in such parts seem more individually focused and have forgotten what the united in USA stands for. There is a dichotomy in the country where they are �ghting for their own rights as individuals against those in disagreement. The ones with full medical cover-age want the choice of which doctor treats them, and what methods are used for their treatments.The passing of Obama Care was considered a miracle. Originally it was believed Obama didn’t have a chance of getting through this reform because of the well-represented strong conservative upper class in the White House. Obama fought with all his strength for the new reform, regardless of all the negative comments.

In discussing Norway and the US, it is obvious that they have two di�erent methodolo-gies in their welfare and healthcare system. The communities, the philosophy and culture—a�ects how things are run, impacting the methods practiced in each country.As the world is getting smaller, similarities will be given a more obvious appearance. But for now, if one of the countries were to represent a welfare-delivery system, while the other represented the medical industrial complex, Norway would be the welfare-delivery system and the US would be the other.

THERE IS ONE WAY AND ANOTHER

#04

Climate-ChamberSemester Fall ´11 (2nd year)Duration 10 weeks Tutors Inga Lindstrøm, Sigurdur Gunn- arson, Hector Pina-Barros Site Sandviksfjellet, Bergen, Norway

Project description:

The given task was to develop a project having in mind climatic challenges and solutions. It had to be given a concept that would give the project some more of a meaning, rather than just building something on the given site that was on the mountain.

Project solution:

On top of a mountain with winds going in every directions, the form of the build-ing became something that was playing with the wind. The concept became self-sufficiency by conservating all kinds of food, making this a typical “Stabbur” a space for storing food.The intention was that someone would come and live here. Work with conserva-tion and getting the resources from the nature, such as catching wild sheeps.The surplus food could be sold to people passing by. In Bergen, it is a strong culture for mountainwalking, saying that it wouldn´t be an unreal situation.This project focuses on process and showing it.

Conceptual object investigation.

First conceptual thoughts.

Thermal experiments in bricks.

Study of wind meeting

volumes.

Consequence study of a form.

Sun- and climatic zones.

Final concep-tualization.A house self-sufficient of food, deal-ing with the strong wind on the mountain.

Exploring the construction and physicality of the concept, leading to a form.

All in all theese studies has always have to have in thought the given situation.

End of process.The suggested project.

#05

Wood-Course

Semester Fall ´11 (2nd year)Duration 2 weeks Tutors Inga Lindstrøm Hector Pina-Barrios Site Kvamsøy, Balestrand, Norway Group-work

Project description:

This was a course about trees. We learned about different wood-types and their qualities. With this information we were given a task to make something out of wood, showing what we learned.

Project solution:

With steep hills going straight down from the top of the hill to the fjord, we decided to make a horizontal mark in the landscape. Our site was in an oak forrest. We dugged out the earth and spread it around in the woods. Then we kept all of the stones that we dugged out, so that this could be a new ground with drainage. To support the walls that appeared while digging, we wove branch-es that in time will be taken over by nature again, making a vertical grass wall.

From End to Start

Early drafts about what we wanted to do.

#06

Lemstova

Project description:

Transform a cluster of Norwegian farm-houses into something new that we called “my room”.The new had to include the things that was learned about traditional construct-ing, climatizing and use this in a new way.

Project solution:

The project turned into a bed & break-fast, where the an experience of food and relaxing was in focus.Given the surrounding nature and si-lence, combined with traditions not well known for everyone. This could be a place to experience that.A structure was added acting as a con-trast, in order to highlight the exist-ing structure.

Semester Spring ´11 (1st year) Duration 4 weeks Tutors Bjarne Ringstad, Bertram Brochmann Trudi Jaeger, Trygve Solløs Site Almås, Bergen, Norway

Section seen towards North-East

South-West Facade

Modell of the building with the addition

Plan over main floor, level 2

Measurements of the building

The given farmhouse to develop

#07

Room for meeting with the unknown

Project description:

The task was to enhance a public outdoor area, making it easier for strangers to interact with each other.

Project solution: The site that was chosen dealed with a lack of direct sunlight most parts of the year. There were a lot of good qualities in the place, which should have made this an ideal place to hang out. After alot of interviews with neighbours and registrations the solution became “Solbergene” the Sun-bergs. Big yellow stones breaking out of the ground. Drawing the rays of light down to the ground and making new seating

areas for people to meet.

Semester Spring ´11, Year I Duration 5 weeks Tutors Mona Steinsland, Trudi Jaeger, Trygve Solløs Site Nøstet, Bergen, Norway

Winter- and summer-sun registration

Local intensity of movements

Public and private zones

Situation-section indicating area of interest

Situation plan with the area of interest

Section with new addition

Plan with new addition

Section with new addition

Plan with new addition Model of the area with the additions

#08

Surviving on an island

Semester Fall ´10, Year I Duration 4 weeks Tutors Espen Rahlff, Bjarne Ringstad, Trygve Solløs Site Stokkevåg, Solund, Norway Group-work

Project description:

On our second day at school, we were sent out to the most west-ern part of Norway. The task was to survive a month on an island, living in a tent, while getting to know the climate that houses in this part of Norway has to be able to handle.

Project solution: Without any facilities we were used to from our everyday modern life, we developed ways of handel-ing this in nature.In addition to this we spent our days registrating weather, typog-raphy and other nessecities for knowing what a house has to deal with.There was a storm in one of the four weeks, were us including all of our things was constantly wet, and things was a challenge. But the cohesion of the group of seven made this a memorable experience.

Top left:Getting from island to island was done by boat.

Top right:This is how werepaired our things.

Bottom left:Preparing fish we caught.

Bottom right: The last day we prepared an exhibition showing what we learned.

#09

Other Works

Education:

Bergen School of Architecture BAS, Bergen, Norway2010-Current, Bachelor of Architecture

University of Bergen UIB, Bergen Norway2009-2010 Art History

Norwegian School of Business and Managment BI, Bergen, Norway2007-2009 Business & Economics

Fana Gymnas, Bergen Norway2003-2006 High school diploma

Languages:

Norwegian (and other scandinavian languages), speak & write fluent.English, speak & write fluent.Tagalog (Filipino) speak well.

OTHER:

2013 Participant in the art group Exiles Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRcbvrsjl1w&feature=youtu.be

2012 Architecture stunt, making a space readable and softer Link: http://www.ba.no/nyheter/article6107842.ece

2011 Participant, Trestykker workshop in Trondheim Link: http://www.archdaily.com/172839/rake-showroom-rake-visningsrom/ Nominated for best art in Natt & Dag magazine 2011

Nominated for the European Union Prize for contemporary arhitecture, Mies van der Rohe Award 2013

2010-2012 Student representant for the appeal board at Bergen school of Architecture

2009-2010 Care assistant for my father

Work history:

2012- on going, Waiter, Escalon Tapas restaurant, Bergen

2012 Actor, music video for Silja Dyngeland Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQJ0QG0JupI

2011-on going, Bartender, To Glass winebar, Bergen

2011-on going, Barista, Smakverket, Bergen art museum

2011 Restaurant manager, Færingen restaurant, Oseana art & culture center

2011 Actor, music video for Silja Dyngeland Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biaWfOHVgg4

2011 Model for designer Maria Stigen

2011 Model for designer Maria Stigen

2010 Passenger counter, Norconsult, Bergen

2010 Sales employee, Deli de Luca, Jerbanestasjonen

2009-2011, Bartender, Privaten bar, Bergen

2010 Waiter, Mezzo restaurant, Bergen

2009-2011, A la carte waiter, Smauet food & wine house, Bergen

2008 Waiter, Bryggen Trateursted, Bergen

2007-2008 Sales employee, Deli de Luca Ole Bulls Plass, Bergen

2007 Sales employee, Deli de Luca Støletorget, Bergen

2007 Sales employee, Deli de Luca Continental, Oslo

2007 Booking assistant, Bergen Finance consulting, Bergen

2006-2008 Waiter, Møtestedet Erna, Bergen

2006-2007 Waiter, Lyststedet Bellevue, Bergen

2003-2009 Waiter & later on head-waiter, Fløien Folkerestaurant, Bergen

Thank You