RSS Feed
Never Underestimate Freedom of Choice
As an RN and as a patient, I believe we are doing many things correctly in our health-care system. The first two that come to mind are freedom of choice and quality of service.
We should never underestimate the importance of our freedom of choice in this country, especially when it comes time to choose a physician. All doctors are not equal and we currently have the freedom to stand up and leave a physicians office if we are not satisfied with the care we're receiving. If we find ourselves in the the care of a "lemon," we can leave and with the help of our primary care doctor, or other sources, find the best doctor for our particular health problem. For those of us who live with unusual and unrelenting chronic illnesses, this is vitally important. Doctors are not interchangeable pieces of glass to be placed in a broken window. Just like us, they are individuals with varying levels of education, competence and innovation in care, not to mention a vast array of virtues like compassion and the gift of listening.
The quality of care that is offered in America is outstanding. We have the technology to diagnose early stages of disease. Our hospitals and outpatient facilities are closely monitored and give impressive care. Why else would we have patients coming from all over the world for care, including our neighbor, Canada? Why do some of our finest young men and women go into medicine as doctors and nurses? The primary care doctors are on a most intimate level with their patients and they definitely do not make the big bucks. Well-educated, compassionate nurses are amazing and give hands-on, efficient care with dignity and accuracy. Today, they have to haul around a laptop or face one in each room to document as well as ensure safety the patient receives the correct medications and treatments. Many of our doctors and nurses are working under very stressful conditions in short-staffed hospitals.
I'm amazed that so many of the problems that are truly overwhelming are lumped into the field of health care when they don't belong there at all. Runaway drug addiction causes enormous strain on families, the health of the individual and the safety of all of us. Isn't this a law enforcement problem? The teen pregnancy rate and their progeny further propagate a life that is "less than." Shouldn't the educational system be attempting to strongly educate these young men and women? Illegal immigrants place a tremendous burden on our health care system but is that originally a health care issue? Doesn't the immigration department need to address that? Many of us who have worked our entire lives to receive benefits resent the fact that illegal intruders in this country expect to receive those same benefits. Where is the fairness and the execution of the law in that?
Politicians ought to properly address the problem areas and fix them, rather than lumping it all into the health-care system and do away with what is already working.
By
Sue Falkner Wood
|
July 1, 2009; 1:04 PM ET
| Category:
Health Care Reform
Save & Share:
Previous: Health "Cost" Reform |
Next: The Pluses and Minuses
Posted by: lensch | July 7, 2009 8:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I am opposed to the public option because it doesn't pick up the $500 Billion of waste every year from the high overhead and compliance costs of private insurers and the high cost of drugs. Because of this we could give Super Medicare to everyone, and it would not cost us anymore than we are now paying, probably less.
I have wonderful insurance from the Harvard Community Health plan many years ago. I know Switzerland has 94 private non-profit insurance companies that are strictly regulated by the government. They get better results (16 basic public health statistics) than we do, and we pay 50% more. So it is possible to keep private insurers if you insist. But the Swiss pay a third more than the French and their results are not as good.
Look, statistics can be tricky, but I am a mathematician so I may have some qualifications there. I would never expect you to come to me if you are sick. But even someone whose expertise lies in another area can see that if every other country in the world gets better results at half the cost, we are doing something seriously wrong.
Posted by: lensch | July 6, 2009 4:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hi Lensch, I know, you love statistics. I don't trust them as they can be bent in one direction or another. I trust what I know after being a nurse for 35 years, married to an RN who is still working everyday and having a son who is an RN and a daughter who is a Speech Pathologist. Our family is immersed in this field. Together, we all have 100 years of experience. That is not trivial.
You're not the only person on Medicare dear fellow, I assume you're a fellow. I have been on Medicare due to disability since 1990. I agree with you about those HMO's and have always stayed away from them. Do you truly believe the "public option" provision that's being proposed will not eventually ruin many wonderful insurance companies? My husband has Blue Shield/Blue Cross and it has been fabulous for our family.
I have the impression that you have already made up your mind which makes you an easy sell for the new proposals. Who do you think will pay for all of the changes many of which don't need changing at all? Can't you see the political aspirations driving all of this? Sue Falkner Wood
Posted by: jimorsue | July 2, 2009 6:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Two Points: First 150,000 Canadians (0.6% of their population) come to the US each year for medical treatment. Half of them are sent here and paid for by the Canadian health care system
for rare treatments that we have more experience in since we are 13 times larger. The remaining 0.3% are probably rich people who want fancy food in the hospital.
In poll after poll, the Canadians have preferred their system to ours by over 90%. The last in 8/2008, had 91% of them preferring their system
The second point concerns physician choice. People assume there will be less freedom to choose one's physician under a government run plan like Medicare for All. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I am 70 years old. I have had at least 5 HMO's and 5 indemnity plans before I got Medicare. Every one of the private plans restricted my choice of physician. Sometimes the doctor they forced me to go to was so bad that I sought help outside my coverage. When I started Medicare, it was a "mihiya." There is no English word to express the feeling I got when I had complete freedom to pick my physician and to go to any specialist he reccommended. I have never been turned away.
The moral is that if you want freedom to choose your doctor, eliminate for profit insurance companies.
Posted by: lensch | July 1, 2009 11:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
Hi Sue,
I have decided to be insulted by your remark that my mind is made up implying I could never change. If you have been following my postings, you would see that a few years ago, I was a strong supporter of a public option, namely allowing people to buy into Medicare. After a lot of study and thought, I decided this wouldn't work; it would leave most of the savings lying on the table, so I changed my position because of the data.
When I try to show you the data that clearly show private health insurance does not work, you say you do not trust statisitcs. If I follow the facts, and you do not, which of us has made up their mind, which of us holds belief that are not supported by the data and in some cases contradicted by the facts?