Socialized Medicine: The Argument to Support Moving Forward
Many people have a misunderstanding that if the government funds health care then THEY control our health care - a concept which in all reality is impossible. What they do provide is funding for hospitals and any facility that delivers health care. It's up to the facilities to decide how to spend the funds allocated to them.
They will run things as they do now except they would have a lot more input and would not be controlled by the insurance companies as they are today.
There would be a department within the Government whose main task would be to establish performance-improving strategies for the hospitals and a timeline for them to be met. Guidelines would be implemented for hospitals to follow and protocols would be initiated by the hospital itself to help them achieve the goals set out by the government. The aim being that care will be standardized across the country. This meaning that hospitals who provide substandard care now will be expected to improve their standards of care in the future. Of course, this would not be achieved quickly nor would it happen overnight, and yes it would cost money, but in the long run, it would be cost effective. The main aim is to improve the quality of care to the patient and at the same time establishing across the board initiatives which all hospitals would need to follow in order to ensure all hospitals are providing the same standard and quality of care. Independent companies would be established to govern the government for example in the UK they have an independent company known as NICE,
Quote
"NICE is an independent organization responsible for providing national guidance on promoting good health and preventing and treating"
More emphasis would be made on care in the community, focusing on keeping the chronically ill out of the hospital and in their own homes. Health education would play a major role focusing on prevention rather than cure. For example, some of our expensive hospital beds are often taken up with the chronically ill which could well have been managed in their own home, freeing up valuable nursing time which can now be spent with the acutely ill. Opening up more opportunities for nurses to develop their skills and utilize their education for something other than carrying out orders from Doctors
Diabetes can be effectively managed in the home with a team of skilled health professionals, accessing the hospitals for major illnesses rather than glucose control. Nurses could play a major role with diabetics in the community, after all, a large part of our formal nursing education focuses on health education, which a lot of us struggle to find time to implement in the hospital environment
Patients will be more compliant with their medication because it is now affordable. They would not be worrying shall I pay the bills or shall I pay for my medication. This would mean Asthmatics, Diabetics, COPDers wouldn't be having the same crisis situations finding themselves in hospital costing a fortune.
Of course, there will always be non-compliant patients, this group will never change easily, but my question is would we see a reduction in non-compliant patients if we made medication affordable. If we had no co-pays for hospital, tests, procedures, scans or doctors visits? My guess is yes we would see a reduction because some of those non-compliant patients are in this situation through no fault of their own but because of financial constraints either due to a poorly paid job or their pension doesn't quite cover everything they need.
Health professionals could more readily access the schools, youth groups with a lot more health education, again focusing on prevention rather than cure. "Catch em, Young".
I am sure you will be saying to yourself we have all this anyway yes but it would be "free" to establishments affording them to spend their funds elsewhere within the education system but at the same time ensuring we start our children's knowledge of a healthy lifestyle off earlier.
Everybody could afford to be pregnant and access high-quality pregnancy care. It would not only be the rich who are able to afford expensive pre-natal care, classes and education it would be available to all without further cost. Pregnancy care is an ideal opportunity for health care professionals to discuss dental care, diet, smoking cessation, birth control, pap smears the list is endless of what you could provide in health education to the younger generation which they can take through life. This population has probably had not much in the way of health care since their teenage years so are ripe for further education, again focusing on prevention rather than cure.
Of course, we all have heard the horror stories of the NHS there are plenty of them, there are more of the negative kind than the positive kind mainly because we focus in on the negative more readily. The Media are only too happy to report stories which involve sensationalism and negative press than to focus in on the 'nice' stories because 'nice' stories don't sell newspapers. Have you always noticed how bad press is always top of the news whereas the nicer stories are thrown In at the end?
The UK is one small country, whereas the 50 states of America are almost like 50 countries so if we took all the negative press in one day from each of the states of America it would be interesting to see/read how many horror stories we would find from the current medical health care system in the USA. Then we could compare the horror stories to the ones reported from the UK then correlate the figures to establish which country offers greater health care and what cost.
Remember the people who pay insurance here in America it will not cost you any more money unless you choose to take out private health insurance. The difference is it will not cost you one cent more unlike now where there are numerous co-pays for anything you access.
I have low co-pays and am very happy with my insurance. For a recent surgery this year I paid $125 to the hospital which covered everything; surgery, anesthesia, and an overnight in the hospital. I did have a $15 copay at the surgeon's office prior to surgery but that also covered the followup visit 10 days later.
However, I did have to change primary MD with this insurance as my old Dr decided to opt out due to low reimbursements by my plan. A public option which competes with private insurance and pays at Medicare rates would encourage private insurance to decrease their reimbursements as well just so they could stay competitive. As docs opt out of low paying plans, choices decrease. It's just economics.
no, universal health care doesn't take away choices. current health care insurance does dictate treatment, limit choice, and is high priced, and i am not satisfied.
however, the proposed bill hr3200 dose take away choices, rights, and freedoms. have you read any of the proposed bill? do you confuse universal health care and the actual bill hr3200 which is actually proposed?
if you support hr3200, because it's title is america's affordable health choices act of 2009, or someone states that this is universal health care with the answers to our problems, without being informed of what is actually written in the bill, without reading it for yourself, my heart goes out to you!
Why do you think you will have less choice? I dont understand you dont get an awful lot of choice now depending on your insurance and who they say you can go see. They do dictate who is in house and who is not. Then you have large co-pays depending on your choice-last year I had surgery then I got a bill from the anaethesist for $900 as he was not covered by my insurance-I was annoyed that the hospital didnt let me know this, as the bill was a shock.
How many would think to check if the anaethesist was in house just as he was about to put you under??
I do, every time my health care policy changes I ask for what is covered and not cover service. You call customer service and check my policy is . It is your responsiblity to know what is a covered service and what is not a covered service.
If I had a large co pay I would put a large amount away each month in my health savings account, like this year I knew I was going to have a large dental bill.
I deal with Medicare and Medcaid, they have all the rules and they keep changing. For example now they are auditing an planning on taking money back for services rendered in 2005.
My communications with Medicare or Medcaid have been less than pleasant, what have your experiences been?
Also dealing with the VA is not easy....... AS a casemanager, I have asked parents with disable children why they pay a large premium each month when their child has medicare and medicaid. I was told to get a simple thing like a wheelchair took months to get approved while the insurance company it was one phone call.
For me, If health care is a right it should go through an amendment to the constitution where all 50 states would agree. Not a partisan vote.
I do not have faith that the US Government can do healthcare any cheaper or more efficiently. I also feel the government has not right to set policies regarding what is a covered service or not.
My state has mandated healthcare for all and the state is bankrupt. Lower income people are forced to purchase health care or pay a hefty fine. I envision this is what is would be like nationally.
It seems like socialized medicine works well in some countries, but then I wonder why people want to come to the USA? Is it for a better way of life ? With 1/6 th of economy tied to government I wonder how America will be?
I am appalled by people who really think corporate world/Wall Street running their healthcare system is called FREEDOM!!!.... I used to work as an investor.....I lost my job at WALLSTREET because of WALLSTREET..... Instead of me listing down all the wrong things/decisions wall street has made for the Great Nation of America.. I will everybody name them inside their heart.....e.g Where's the housin market?
"President Obama has called for a serious and reasoned debate about his plans to overhaul the health-care system. Any such debate must include the question of whether it is constitutional for the federal government to adopt and implement the president's proposals. Consider one element known as the "individual mandate," which would require every American to have health insurance, if not through an employer then by individual purchase. This requirement would particularly affect young adults, who often choose to save the expense and go without coverage. Without the young to subsidize the old, a comprehensive national health system will not work. But can Congress require every American to buy health insurance?"
According to this article the jury is still out to mandate health insurance. Interesting questions.
Why do you think you will have less choice? I dont understand you dont get an awful lot of choice now depending on your insurance and who they say you can go see. They do dictate who is in house and who is not. Then you have large co-pays depending on your choice-last year I had surgery then I got a bill from the anaethesist for $900 as he was not covered by my insurance-I was annoyed that the hospital didnt let me know this, as the bill was a shock.
How many would think to check if the anaethesist was in house just as he was about to put you under??
I wouldn't check if the Anesthetist was in network just as he was about to put me under. I would check that weeks in advance. Most hospitals contract with a specific anesthesia group or do it in house. It is a simple phone call.
You see, the problem with healthcare now is it causes Americans to be responsible. First, you have to make sure you have health insurance. If you can't afford it, you need to find better work so that you may do so. Then, if you have a high deductible, you need to make sure you are saving money every month, just in case you may need to use your plan. Or, you can use the money you would be saving to cover your deductible and pay more each month for a plan with a lower deductible. Either way, it's your choice. But the problem is America is filled with a bunch of lazy people who think they are entitled to everything. Even people who come here from other countries are falling into this entitlement mentallity. This country used to be filled with hard workers who were too proud to take a handout and who would do whatever it takes to keep their family safe and fed. Now, they walk around with their hands out complaining about how it's just to hard and how the working class can't make it. I sincerely feel bad for people who may do everything right and something terrible happens and they lose their insurance. If the total strain on the healthcare system was just from people in that situation, then we wouldn't have the problems that we have now. But it's not, it because of a large amount of people who don't have health insurance because it isn't important to them. Because they would rather have a nice car and fancy clothes. Because by now, society has taught them that it will be taken care of by someone else.
Government run healthcare may supply the whole country with healthcare, but it will have to be rationed compared to what we are used to now. The economics of this country cannot support healthcare for the entire nation without rationing, or cost analyzing, or whatever you want to call it. And it will, with no doubt, teach the American people how to be less responsible and more dependent on the government. This tactic has been described in many books written over many decades, and is the first main step towards Socialism, Facism, and Communism. Those government styles may work in France and Norway and wherever else, but I'm quite sure that the American people will lose their minds when they realize all of the other things that come with those governmental systems besides Universal Healthcare.
In my state where 97% are insured why should my benefits suffer because 3 percent choose not to sign up?
What state is it? I may consider moving there... What about your country, is it also 97%. Fallowing that logic I can say the same thing because in my household (street, village, town, county, state etc.) 100% of people are insured...
3% percent choose not to sigh up? Are you sure, maybe they couldn't afford it, or unemployed at the time?
What state is it? I may consider moving there... What about your country, is it also 97%. Fallowing that logic I can say the same thing because in my household (street, village, town, county, state etc.) 100% of people are insured...
3% percent choose not to sigh up? Are you sure, maybe they couldn't afford it, or unemployed at the time?
The state decides where or not you can afford it. When you file your taxes you have to provide your health policy number, it not you have to pay a fine which is similar to the insurance cost. Unemployed, you get some support but the state decides if you can afford it or pay a BIG fine.
If you are not a citizen and not in the state for 5 years you do not qualify, several public hospitals are near bankrupt.
I will move away from the discussion of the most recent posts. I do not feel that all health and medical care should be socialized. I think that promotion, prevention, and primary care should be socialized with mandates for our children and young adults to receive comprehensive services in these areas. Youth are our future and they should be mentally and physically able and healthy to manage their lives and this country.
Right now, we're experiencing increasing rates of chronic illness among our children and young adults. This does not bode well for the U.S. I've read where we do not even rank in the top five in health status. That's an abomination for a country that spends the most on its health care system. I think we can see a better return on investment if we invest in our youth and young adults and stop spending so much on those of us who used free will to decide how we would treat our bodies. I think we should keep private insurance as the sole means of coverage for us middle-aged and older people and take care of our young people.
Specializes in PICU, NICU, L&D, Public Health, Hospice.
There is no question that we need to reform our health delivery system in this country. Unfortunately, the civil debate has been sucker punched by the rant. While it is clear that reform will not be free it should be equally clear that doing nothing is also not "FREE". Healthcare costs are currently at about 16% of our GDP, what rate will our children inherit? In what year will it represent 20%, what year will it be a quarter of our GDP? In an economy based upon capitalism companies will continue to look for ways to trim that "bottom line" expense up to and including moving jobs to countries with much lower costs. A study in 2007 found that more than 60% of bankrupcies had a medical cause, and that the share of bankrupcies attributable to medical problems rose by 50% between 2001 and 2007.
People who are afraid of change are not considering the consequences of the status quo. Our current system is increasingly expensive and increasingly exclusive. While capitalism is not a bad thing it cannot be expected to create a uniformly available health insurance program for the population. Insurance companies are generally "for-profit" and the profit, not the patient, is the objective. Currently insurance companies have CONSIDERABLE control over who gets what care when and where. Anyone who does not acknowledge this fact has either never had to interact with the insurance companies to any degree or is completely out of touch with the experiences of his/her neighbors.
July 22, 2009
Statement Attributable to:
J. James Rohack, MD
President, American Medical Association
"At this historic moment for our nation, the AMA is working to improve our health care system for patients and physicians. We must fix what's broken and keep what's working.
"Health insurance for working families is disappearing along with job security - this is bad for the economy and bad for families.
"The status quo is unacceptable. The AMA has made clear its commitment to health reform this year. Congress must take action to expand coverage to the uninsured through a choice of plans and eliminate denials for pre-existing conditions, include prevention and wellness initiatives, address medical liability reform and repeal the broken Medicare physician payment system that harms seniors' access to care. Without repeal, physicians face payment cuts of nearly 40 percent over the next five years that will force them to limit the number of seniors they can treat - right as the baby boomers begin aging into Medicare.
"AMA will stay engaged to get a final bill this year that improves the system for patients and physicians signed into law. Physicians are at the heart of the health care system, and the AMA considers its position at the center of the health reform debate an honor and serious responsibility."
Are physicians in favor of reform? You bet. Sure there are some that are afraid that reform will affect their incomes, but for the vast majority it will be a wash. Most physicians that I know did not enter medicine to become wealthy. They wanted to practice medicine, take care of people, make a difference. The fact that they could make a lot of money was a nice bonus. There are greedy people in all walks of life, they do not define their professions...not yet. We need reform, we need it soon. Why not engage in some research, thoughtful debate, and american inventiveness and create our own system for universal/socialist health insurance plan.
azhiker96, BSN, RN
1,130 Posts
I have low co-pays and am very happy with my insurance. For a recent surgery this year I paid $125 to the hospital which covered everything; surgery, anesthesia, and an overnight in the hospital. I did have a $15 copay at the surgeon's office prior to surgery but that also covered the followup visit 10 days later.
However, I did have to change primary MD with this insurance as my old Dr decided to opt out due to low reimbursements by my plan. A public option which competes with private insurance and pays at Medicare rates would encourage private insurance to decrease their reimbursements as well just so they could stay competitive. As docs opt out of low paying plans, choices decrease. It's just economics.