Socialized Medicine....WHAT IF?

Published

Socialized Medicine...what will happen if Obama changes the US health care system like he says he will and turns it into socialized medicine or something similar? What will the ramifications be for us nurses?

Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.

Wikipedia has a reputation of inaccuracy, which tends to make me think it's unreliable. Granted, wikipedia keeps up to date descriptions, but users really have to check that they are correct. I use established dictionaries (in print) to verify the meaning of words.

That said, I must take issue with your acceptance of Wikipedia's rendition of the meaning of "socialized medicine". President-elect Barack Obama hasn't issued any statements regarding "nationalized" health care, and from his book that he published outlining his platform, before his election as President-elect of the USA, he intends to keep insurance companies running the program (so as not to "reinvent the wheel"), with increased monitoring and outside direction; and decreased salaries at the top.

Now that it seems Senator Tom Dashle will be heading the Health and Human Services Department, he will oputline his strategy soon (I hope). In no spoken or written statement has President - elect Obama said that the US government will determine policy or pay care givers. It is my understanding that any government involvement is restricted to a "cashier" role, simply taking in monies and paying out fees as directed by Senator Dashle's people. These "people" will be medical professionals, not clerks given hard and fast rules.

President-elect Obama has indicated his wish to have Mental Health on an equal basis (payment wise), with Physical Health. Halleluyah!! Since the mind drives the body, it seems that doing otherwise has been counter productive.

As always, in the USA we like to be unique and better than any other country's similar programs. So look toward a better health care program, and better newborn morbidity and mortality stats (as well as all others, but it's the newborns who keep us near third world country examples). Nations with more generous health care wellness enhancement (illness prevention) programs show us up all the time. Canada withdrew food products with saturated and uinsaturated fats from the shelves of their markets, as the care of resulting CHD is expensive.

They also jumped on mandatory seatbelt requirements and "stop smoking" recommendations (with incentives/perks for those who stopped), as soon as it was proven that costly illness resulted from those behaviors. Curiously, given Americans' way of thinking, Canadian citizens never resented those who eschued seat belts; and smoked, as causing more of their tax money to be spent on health care, nor did they support those unwise choices. The "blame game" seems to stop at their border.

Scare tactics, calling oponents' plans ugly names like "socialized" are for campaigning, not actualities. The poster of the unquoted remark (which I deleted, but to which I wanted to respond) seems to think that renovation of our health system means we will adopt another country's (failing) program.

Let's be part of the solution, and post things that work about healthcare programs elsewhere! :yeah:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Wikipedia has a reputation of inaccuracy, which tends to make my think it's unreliable. Granted, wikipedia keeps up to date descriptions, but users really have to check that they are correct. I use established dictionaries (in print) to verify the meaning of words.

That said, I must take issue with your acceptance of Wikipedia's rendition of the meaning of "socialized medicine". President-elect Barack Obama hasn't issued any statements regarding "nationalized" health care, and from his book that he published outlining his platform, before his election as President-elect of the USA, he intends to keep insurance companies running the program (so as not to "reinvent the wheel"), with increased monitoring and outside direction; and decreased salaries at the top.

I don't have much time, so I'll address these two paragraphs, if you have answered these points in the rest of your post then accept my apologises.

Which part of the wikipedia entries do you think inaccurate? As someone who lives in the UK (or England if that's easier for you to locate) I wouldn't have posted the links if I didn't think they were broadly accurate of the current stage of play over here. If you highlight your concerns I'll do my best to find alternative sources for?

Would newspaper links like this be okay?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/nhs

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.
I don't have much time, so I'll address these two paragraphs, if you have answered these points in the rest of your post then accept my apologises.

Which part of the wikipedia entries do you think inaccurate? As someone who lives in the UK (or England if that's easier for you to locate) I wouldn't have posted the links if I didn't think they were broadly accurate of the current stage of play over here. If you highlight your concerns I'll do my best to find alternative sources for?

Would newspaper links like this be okay?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/nhs

Thank you so much for the link to the Guardian! However, private rooms used as a deterant to "superbugs", rather than scrupulous handwashing incentives doesn't make me believe in that paper's research of articles. I have been an Infection Control Nurse for many years (qualification for my viewpoint). :bow:

As a Canadian (and American with dual citizenship), I definitely know where the UK is. It may be necessary to add your qualifications to analyse the accuracy of the wikipedia links, so I can choose to believe them, or not.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
It may be necessary to add your qualifications to analyse the accuracy of the wikipedia links, so I can choose to believe them, or not.

Why don't you provide your qualifications and experience that allow you to doubt the content of the wiki links supplied.

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/index.htm

http://www.nhs.uk/Pages/homepage.aspx

If you have any queries, maybe you should do your own research as you seem to doubt my personal knowledge as a resident of the UK.

That said, I must take issue with your acceptance of Wikipedia's rendition of the meaning of "socialized medicine".

Now that I am more awake, perhaps you can show us this link as I've checked and can only find the three relating to the NHS?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I'm not an expert by any means, especially in the details of the British system. My main concern was the many comments in this thread that conflate all forms of government involvement in healthcare and make no distinctions among the various proposals. Just for example, no one in the incoming administration has proposed anything that could even remotely be called "socialized" but if one listens to many conservative politicians that's what one would think.

On the other side, many "liberal" politicians are trying to sell "universal healthcare" plans that are mostly about forcing people to buy private insurance - when we know that in America, having insurance does not mean having access to the care you need.

No problems happy to share my experience and/or knowledge.

Re the Conservatives, they know that "fear of the unknown" works for some, as well as underlying belief that the private sector is good, state bad.

On the last point, as poorly paid public sector worker I cannot afford for my tax pounds to be wasted on the private sector who, in my opinion deliver poorer services than when the State delivers them.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.
Why don't you provide your qualifications and experience that allow you to doubt the content of the wiki links supplied.

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/index.htm

http://www.nhs.uk/Pages/homepage.aspx

If you have any queries, maybe you should do your own research as you seem to doubt my personal knowledge as a resident of the UK.

Now that I am more awake, perhaps you can show us this link as I've checked and can only find the three relating to the NHS?

Oooooh, "getmeoutofhere", your response is so hostile! I am a trained behavioural analyst with 48 years of experience in nursing education.

It is the considered opinion of groups of educators, including the Assistant Dean of Cabrillo College in California who have decided that "wikipedia", when used by students, sometimes contains aberrant information, leading them astray in their educational assignments, generally.

I do research information I need in the course of my professional duties, on NIH, Canadian Health agenciy sites, as well as issues of relevant periodicals, such as The New England Journal of Medicine. The internet is a Godsend for all that, as it cuts the time I need to spend on such things.

For posts on this site, I tend to trust my recall. :nurse:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ER,ICU,L+D,OR.
Socialized Medicine...what will happen if Obama changes the US health care system like he says he will and turns it into socialized medicine or something similar? What will the ramifications be for us nurses?

Sounds very good for all of us.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.
Sounds very good for all of us.

Nurses will have better staffing (since commercial industrial profit making companies - HMOs and other owners of medical practices and hospitals- won't be in place, looking for their profit by cutting needed staff, so the execs can make more money.

Nurses will get better health care coverage, as will all others living legally in this country. This will result in better health maintenance by illness/wellness prevention educational programs, so patients will not be in as serious shape when they're admitted to hospoital or long term care facilities, and they'll be well informed about their responsibilities toward their own health. (Of course there will always be those in denial, non compliance or simply rebellious mental states who do become more critical.) Working more diligently with those people will diminish costs of unnecessary ED , MD visits, and hospitalization + rehab for inordinately long periods of time.

Since President-elect Obama plans to place equal emphasis on funding care for mental and physical illnesses, there will be more resources and funding to care for and assist those with the above tendencies, to be monitored and act more responsibly. :yeah:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ER,ICU,L+D,OR.

I wonder if that will come to bear, now that they are finally admitting we are in a recession again

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in OB, HH, ADMIN, IC, ED, QI.
I wonder if that will come to bear, now that they are finally admitting we are in a recession again

There is more reason to make health care available now, through government resources (not their taking over healthcare decision making). Funding the "universal" program for all will keep working people healthier, so they won't lose their jobs due to longer absences (which usually happens as a result of late diagnosis, due to fear of the cost of care as it is now).

When companies reward employees for taking no sick days and place the responsibility for getting health insurance on them, usually other priorities are deemed more important, and choosing no insurance means delayed care, which can be disasterous. That is why the housing/banking situation is what it is - the peoples' desire-turned-to-need for more house than they could afford, made shaky mortgages attractive, even though negative amortization occurs which makes the financed amount larger than the worth of the home.

When salaries of health insurance company executives diminish (hopefully to disappear), more money is available for health care providers' salaries. Also when limitations are placed on doctors' ego inspired, equipment hogging (e.g. lasers in all offices) practises; and radiological equipment is distributed reasonably to those medical centers with the highest need for them (rather than as a means of attracting more patients for profit), money will be available for personnel and good equipment for providing nursing care. Most patients who are being discharged from acute care hospitals can get good care at home with Home Health resources, yet few are given that help. Instead they are farmed out to SNFs and worse, which is more costly.

Discharge Planners are the real experts regarding appropriate patient placement and they need to be given the responsibility and additional personnel for providing that, rather than doctors (who have limited appreciation or recall of their patients' circumstances) determining patients' needs following hospitalization. They know how and what home health agencies to call, to be sure a nurse goes to a patients home within 24 hours of their discharge. Many patients are sent home now with no one there to see how thay're doing, or get their meals if they're unable/unmotivated to do that. Often they don't realize their own limitations or are embarressed to disclose them. I knew a blind patient who was sent home with a pamphlet to read about agencies that might help him. He was wheelchair bound, with no desire to get help.

Much time is wasted now when home health agencies have to call insurance companies to see if there is sufficient coverage available to take care of patients' needs. Often SNFs which are so much more expensive are used due to lack of home care coverage. It's been proven in several studies that patients do better, recover faster, and suffer less emotional trauma when they have adequate care at home.

Believe me, the doctors' offices haven't taken the initiative to follow up with even a 'phone call to the patient, or to call "meals on wheels" or transportation services which might be necessary. Patients are told upon their discharge to call their doctor's office for an appointment in so many days, and don't realize that they need to report a down turn in their recovery (or circumstances) sooner, or what resources are out there if they're unable to pay their 'phone or other utility bills. Many times their 'phones have been turned off during their hospitalization.....

All the above is possible with good planning and policy making by knowledgeable, experienced and objective health care providers who have the authority to create better circumstances for patient care.

Let's be part of the solution, rather than being nay sayers scared of the shadow of past health care practices. This opportunity has been a long time coming! :up:

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Let's be part of the solution, rather than being nay sayers scared of the shadow of past health care practices. This opportunity has been a long time coming! :up:

Absolutely. Great post!:yeah:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion