How Will Universal Health Care Change Nursing?

  1. How will universal health care change the Nursing profession? Will we finally get ratios? Will our pay go up, or down? What about benefits? Will the quality of care improve, slide, or stay the same? How would a "single-payer" system be structured? Would this be the end of the insurance industry as we know it? I would like to hear from everyone who has an opinion about any of these questions.
  2. Visit arelle68 profile page

    About arelle68

    Joined: Jun '07; Posts: 305; Likes: 519
    RN; from US
    Specialty: 3 year(s) of experience in Mental and Behavioral Health

    227 Comments

  3. by   PostOpPrincess
    This is a very complex question and requires some pontification. But my standard answer is always the same, no pay? small pay?

    No nurse.
  4. by   S.N. Visit
    Since it would be run by the gov, I think we could expect Universal health care to be very similar to our Veterans Administration Hospitals. I only know of a handful of Vet's and not one has anything good to say about their tx at the VA.
    I have a feeling, It will take many many years for Universal Health Care to ever be a success.
  5. by   looking4wrd
    Universal healthcare coverage scares me. Such a huge overhaul of our healthcare system cannot be done without sacrificing tons of jobs, spending tons of money and making too many drastic changes. We are trillions of dollars in debt as it is! How are they going to pay for all this? I think it will result in lowered or capped pay for nurses, a decrease in quality care, an increase in waiting for approval for medical procedures etc, etc. I think it would definitely be the end of our healthcare system as we know it. I see nothing good coming out of this at all. Look at the hassle we have to go through for anything that government oversees...do you really want them involved in your medical care? I don't want them involved in mine or my loved ones. Maybe someone out there can put my fears to rest. (I think the we all better brace ourselves.)
  6. by   loriangel14
    What hassles do you foresee? I work under UHC and it is no problem.We don't have to deal with the government directly even though many seem to think they will have to.
  7. by   1RRRN
    Think about all the 44+ million people without coverage. Single payer is DOA now. That would be much more gradual. What if everybody had insurance? Wouldn't that be good. What if insurance was simplified and more standardized? What if all the adminstrative costs dropped like a rock? What if all the information in the world was at your finger tips? What if Doctors and Nurses got control of the system instead of the insurance companies trying to ram people through the production line? What if drug companies had fair prices and fewer side effects? It is going to get better for patients and therefore nurses! But, I wouldn't count on 1000 bed hospitals being there forever.
  8. by   markuskristian
    Quote from looking4wrd
    I think it would definitely be the end of our healthcare system as we know it.
    Perhaps not the end of healthcare, but definitely the beginning of a crappy healthcare system. As unfortunate as it is, the US doesn't have enough staff, all staff (MD, nurse, techs, ect.) to support universal healthcare. Just my humble opinion.
  9. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from 1RRRN
    Think about all the 44+ million people without coverage. .
    Seriously - this myth must be confronted each time it is stated. This figure comes from the U.S. Census Bureau. What most people don't know, however, is that the Bureau counts anyone who went without health insurance during any part of the previous year as "uninsured." So if you weren't covered for just one day in 2007, you're one of the 47 million.

    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArti...73280379232127

    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/200...-mister-r.html

    http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...718153509.aspx

    Also, if you can, watch John Stossel's report "Whose Body Is it Anyway? Sick in America" . .. our nursing econ prof showed it last night. Eye opening rebuttal to Sicko.

    http://abcnewsstore.go.com/webapp/wc...egoryId=100019

    "Then the good news...Yes, health costs are rising faster than inflation, but a few experiments show that there is a different way, one that reduces costs, but still makes medicine good for patients. First, Stossel talks to doctors who deal directly with patients, without insurance, and therefore have a different relationship with their patients. These doctors answer patients' emails, give out their own cell phone numbers, and work hard to cater to their patients. He also looks at new kind of medical clinic, walk-in clinics, in places like drugstores and grocery stores. Stossel also talks to John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods, about his company's new healthcare plan which puts employees more in control of their healthcare dollars.

    Harvard's Regina Hertzlinger sums it up: Who should decide whether you live or die? Is it gonna be a government? Is it gonna be an insurer? Or is it gonna be you and me?? . .. ."



    steph
  10. by   Spidey's mom
    More myth-busting and this has been said for years but people are still not getting it.

    http://www.manhattan-institute.org/h...hat_health.htm

    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]What Health Insurance Crisis?
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]August 29, 2004[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]By David Gratzer
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Who and where are the 45 million Americans that the Census Bureau found without health insurance? With little fanfare last year, the BlueCross BlueShield Assn. released a report based in part on analyzing the Census Bureau data. Its findings may surprise some.

    A full 16% of the uninsured, the study found, have incomes above $75,000 a year and could obviously afford insurance if they chose to buy it. Roughly a third of those lacking insurance earn $50,000 a year or more.

    You may think that a poor single mom with three children living in South-Central Los Angeles is among the uninsured, but in fact, she is eligible for Medicaid, as are her children. The BlueCross BlueShield study notes that 1 in 3 of the uninsured are eligible for-but not enrolled in-a government-sponsored health program. Because Medicaid and children's health programs allow patients to be signed up literally in the ER, these individuals could be covered; they just choose not to do the paperwork.

    And of the remaining uninsured, 6 million lack insurance for only a few months.

    The bottom line: About 8.2 million Americans, not 45 million, are chronically uninsured and low-income. And they are the working poor. They have jobs but, because of the high cost of insurance, no coverage. ... "
  11. by   Spidey's mom
    http://www.galen.org/

    Watch the video contest winner.

    The health debate is now fo cused on the question of a "public option" -- with most Democrats insisting that any reform package must include a government-run health-insurance program that would compete with private insurers.

    It's a terrible idea. With access to taxpayer dollars, a public option could easily crowd out private competition by selling policies at artificially low prices.

    Fans of the idea promise that won't happen, claiming that the government plan would play by the same rules as private plans and would pay hospitals and doctors at almost the same rates as private insurers.

    But the history of Medicare shows that this is a promise the government just won't keep. At its inception, Congress assured hospitals, physicians and other caregivers that Medicare would pay all costs associated with providing medical services to beneficiaries.

    The government claimed it wouldn't decide which medical costs were justified. In fact, original Medicare law prohibited officials from questioning the appropriateness of health-care outlays.

    In the '80s, the government scrapped this system. Officials claimed that hospitals, insensitive to costs, were needlessly driving up public health-care spending. Congress imposed a system to pay hospitals and physicians at rates determined by the government -- in layman's terms, price controls.

    Medicare's supporters also went to great lengths, at the program's birth, to convince seniors that they'd still have the option of buying private insurance. The Medicare law specifically says it does not "preclude any state from providing, or any individual from purchasing or otherwise securing, protection against the cost of any health services."

    Yet, despite these promises, Medicare drew virtually the entire senior population onto public insurance.

    So what, some will argue -- when so many seniors lacked any health insurance before Medicare? The main "evidence" for that claim is based on a single survey published by the government in 1964 that found that only 54 percent of seniors had health insurance. In fact, that survey excluded many seniors with coverage -- such as those covered by private indemnity policies and existing government plans for dependents of military personnel and for the poor.

    The distortions and broken promises go on and on. Originally, Congress promised that Medicare wouldn't lead to interference in the doctor-patient relationship by restricting seniors' ability to buy medical services privately. That went out the window in 1997. Now doctors must get out of Medicare entirely for two years before they can accept private-paying patients who are eligible for Medicare.

    Yet, despite its monopoly on seniors' health care, the government has been unable to control Medicare's costs. The Medicare trustees recently announced that the program is at least $37.8 trillion in the red over coming decades -- and will start running out of money in just eight years.

    The claim that Medicare's administrative costs are lower than private plans also is bogus: The government doesn't count all its costs, including collecting premiums and paying for office and staff expenses, and it does little to stop fraud and abuse of the program, which costs at least $60 billion a year. When all costs are considered, Medicare loses its advantage.

    Medicare's history shows what's in store under a "public option" for health insurance: Americans will lose their private coverage and come under the government's wing. Costs will continue to soar, and health quality will decline.

    The government's sorry track record with Medicare just doesn't justify a multitrillion-dollar public plan.

    Grace-Marie Turner is president of the Galen Institute, a nonprofit research organization focusing on patient-centered solutions to health reform.


    steph
  12. by   tmgsn
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]
    I AM SO OFFENDED!!! You need to stop reading articles like the one here below my response and get with the real world. I am a single working mom of three children, only I am not blessed enough to live in Cali, (it is way too high a cost of living) they actually care about their residents.
    REALLY? I have to tell you that is bogus. My kids do not qualify for medicaid. I applied. I did ALL THAT PAPERWORK, because I love my kids, and my $1800 per month was too much money!!! They qualified--- 4 months later-- for partially paid medicaid by me. I AM NOT COVERED AT ALL! Adults get nothing!! Kids only get some benefits, no orthodontic coverage, horrible state dentist that do not place spacers when they pull teeth from pogo stick accidents, you have no clue what you are spouting! Stop quoting other peoples crap, take a walk on the wild side-- open your eyes.

    You need to step out of your comfortable reading world and into the rest of our worlds, take a look at it from down here. You might be singing a different tune.

    You remind me of when senator John McCain said, "Our economy is just fine."

    ......."You may think that a poor single mom with three children living in South-Central Los Angeles is among the uninsured, but in fact, she is eligible for Medicaid, as are her children. The BlueCross BlueShield study notes that 1 in 3 of the uninsured are eligible for-but not enrolled in-a government-sponsored health program. Because Medicaid and children's health programs allow patients to be signed up literally in the ER, these individuals could be covered; they just choose not to do the paperwork."

    Generally, I am happy that you older individuals have done things right for yourselves, that you have good jobs, husbands, families, etc, etc. But, when you start stomping all over my hard working, calloused bottomed feet my blood starts to boil!

    I am very American. I am as hard working as they get, harder. I am working my way through school. My ex does not pay. Every bump in the road rises to meet us. But the Lord looks out for us. We love each other and hold on tight. Please do not preach that of which you know nothing.
  13. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from mia70
    [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]
    I AM SO OFFENDED!!! You need to stop reading articles like the one here below my response and get with the real world. I am a single working mom of three children, only I am not blessed enough to live in Cali, (it is way too high a cost of living) they actually care about their residents.
    REALLY? I have to tell you that is bogus. My kids do not qualify for medicaid. I applied. I did ALL THAT PAPERWORK, because I love my kids, and my $1800 per month was too much money!!! They qualified--- 4 months later-- for partially paid medicaid by me. I AM NOT COVERED AT ALL! Adults get nothing!! Kids only get some benefits, no orthodontic coverage, horrible state dentist that do not place spacers when they pull teeth from pogo stick accidents, you have no clue what you are spouting! Stop quoting other peoples crap, take a walk on the wild side-- open your eyes.

    You need to step out of your comfortable reading world and into the rest of our worlds, take a look at it from down here. You might be singing a different tune.

    You remind me of when senator John McCain said, "Our economy is just fine."

    ......."You may think that a poor single mom with three children living in South-Central Los Angeles is among the uninsured, but in fact, she is eligible for Medicaid, as are her children. The BlueCross BlueShield study notes that 1 in 3 of the uninsured are eligible for — but not enrolled in — a government-sponsored health program. Because Medicaid and children's health programs allow patients to be signed up literally in the ER, these individuals could be covered; they just choose not to do the paperwork."

    Generally, I am happy that you older individuals have done things right for yourselves, that you have good jobs, husbands, families, etc, etc. But, when you start stomping all over my hard working, calloused bottomed feet my blood starts to boil!

    I am very American. I am as hard working as they get, harder. I am working my way through school. My ex does not pay. Every bump in the road rises to meet us. But the Lord looks out for us. We love each other and hold on tight. Please do not preach that of which you know nothing.

    Who are you talking to?

    The websites I posted are from real people who do real research. They are trying to find patient centered options. And I'm in the second week of a 5 week Nursing Health Care Economics class where we learn the real statistical information to make decisions. And we have speakers from different health care institutions come to talk with us and enlighten us.

    My main concern was the myth of 47 million uninsured . .. did you read all the links where that is proven untrue?

    Handing our health care over to the government, when the government has made a mess of Medicare already, is a big mistake.

    And I have walked in your shoes - I was a divorced parent of two young boys. I have no health insurance right now and haven't for about 2 years.

    I simply do not believe, for many good reasons which I linked to, universal health care is the answer.


    steph
  14. by   Spidey's mom

close