Is Health Care a Right or a Privilege

[Futuredoctr]

I'm in this really interesting class considering this issue and in light of all the politics going on right now, and I was curious what my future colleagues thoughts were on the subject. Please vote, and if you choose 'other', please explain.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[JonnyG]

health care is a right, health insurance is not. People pay their plumbers more than they are willing to pay a doctor.

 

[Jack Daniel]

I voted for "right", but I think it's more complex than the two choices presented.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.​

From the Declaration of Independence.​

Obviously people should have access to medical care, (a right), but that doesn't mean they shouldn't help pay for the costs involved. If our country could figure out how to reduce these astronomical costs, it would be a lot easier to work through this issue. But, even if healthcare isn't "a right" philosophically, it should be treated as such because having a healthy population (i.e. productive & happy) is in our nation's best interests.

 

[Spleen]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.​

Our founding fathers did not have massive medical complexes with ICU's, chemotherapy, CT, MRI, or even laparscopic surgery. Doctors in that era were capable of very little, and often did more harm. The life reference is with regards to a government taking it from you.

Humans have lived for thousands of years with no formal medical care and are capable of doing so still.

Death is our only true inalienable right.

If medicine and it's delivery is a right that means some one else has to deliver it. That means you and I. To force us to give these services is against my/our rights. How do you rectify that? You can't. Healthcare is not a right.
​

 

[167649]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.​

Our founding fathers did not have massive medical complexes with ICU's, chemotherapy, CT, MRI, or even laparscopic surgery. Doctors in that era were capable of very little, and often did more harm. The life reference is with regards to a government taking it from you.​

Humans have lived for thousands of years with no formal medical care and are capable of doing so still.​

Death is our only true inalienable right.​

If medicine and it's delivery is a right that means some one else has to deliver it. That means you and I. To force us to give these services is against my/our rights. How do you rectify that? You can't. Healthcare is not a right.​

Humans have lived for thousands of years without universal sufferage or universal education. People have to deliver education and sufferage just like healthcare. Why are those "rights" and not healthcare?

And your point with government taking life from you, even with a completely, 100% socialized government takeover of the system (which I am against) nobody is forcing you to get treatments. Everyone simply has the right to choose and has access.

 

[167649]

Death is our only true inalienable right.

Sorry man, but I'm cracking up. Not that I don't think people can die, but I just got the image of Dr. Kervorkian lurking around SDN.

 

[DC DOC]

Just because the technology has changed over the past two hundred years does not mean that the responsiblity of a physician has. Life is not a commodity and as such, physicians take on the responsibility of caring for the poor, the needy, the sick, etc. If you don't think that it is an "unalienable right", then why are you following a career that is designed to give people that very necesity? When you take the oath to become a physician, believe it or not, you agree to provide health-care to all, not with the stipulation that if you are not compensated sufficiently you will turn patients away. Go into medicine for the right reasons, and not for capitalism upon human lives.

 

[THP]

Humans have lived for thousands of years without universal sufferage or universal education. People have to deliver education and sufferage just like healthcare. Why are those "rights" and not healthcare?

And your point with government taking life from you, even with a completely, 100% socialized government takeover of the system (which I am against) nobody is forcing you to get treatments. Everyone simply has the right to choose and has access.

Those are not rights either.

Actually, I believe Edwards and Obama have both advocated making it illegal not to have health insurance.

 

[167649]

Those are not rights either.

Actually, I believe Edwards and Obama have both advocated making it illegal not to have health insurance.

People do not have the right to vote in this country? Are you not from the US?

Education is a bit more complex than sufferage, i'll give you that. Post-secondary education is not a right. But we have public tax supported schools in this country because of the basic premise that primary and secondary education is a right and not a priviledge. Your taxes subsidize public schools in the most under-privileged neighborhoods in the country.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Our founding fathers did not have massive medical complexes with ICU's, chemotherapy, CT, MRI, or even laparscopic surgery. Doctors in that era were capable of very little, and often did more harm. The life reference is with regards to a government taking it from you.

Humans have lived for thousands of years with no formal medical care and are capable of doing so still.

Death is our only true inalienable right.

If medicine and it's delivery is a right that means some one else has to deliver it. That means you and I. To force us to give these services is against my/our rights. How do you rectify that? You can't. Healthcare is not a right.

Sure, that's one interpretation--"deprive" as "take away". Others interpret it broadly as "prevent from getting". While it's true that the founding fathers didn't have the complexities of today, now we do have all those things to consider because we can save and prolong lives with our medical technology. Still, I go back to my point--whether it's a right or not, as a nation it's in our best interest to have a healthy population--not just the ones who are privileged to get it. The challenge is figuring out how to use our technology without going broke.

 

[THP]

People do not have the right to vote in this country? Are you not from the US?

Education is a bit more complex than sufferage, i'll give you that. Post-secondary education is not a right. But we have public tax supported schools in this country because of the basic premise that primary and secondary education is a right and not a priviledge. Your taxes subsidize public schools in the most under-privileged neighborhoods in the country.

Nowhere in the constitution does it say you have the right to vote in a presidential election. Of course you have the right to vote in your local election. I was more referring to education.

 

[endocardium]

I think access to appropriate and necessary health care should be a right in any civilized country. It is a very fundamental right, too, in my opinion. To me, it makes very little sense to deny something so basic to the wellbeing of a society to a huge chunk of your citizens (50 million), to turn your back to them only to give it to others. Health care rationing may be inevitable at the point in time, but if we are going to do that (and we already are), we should do it openly and fairly. I think our current system of health care is unethical and inhumane. We are behind the times, the health of our population is declining, our infant mortality rate is higher than it should be, our life expectancy is lower than it should be, many are without adequate access to health care, big business is telling us how to treat our patients, and our current system ranks something like 37th in the world. I think much of it has to do with the way we make health care into a business, where the profit margin is more critical than the health of our population. More than that, I think it is a problem with our ideology; health care is a right, not a privilege.

 

[speeter]

I think access to appropriate and necessary health care should be a right in any civilized country. It is a very fundamental right, too, in my opinion. To me, it makes very little sense to deny something so basic to the wellbeing of a society to a huge chunk of your citizens (50 million), to turn your back to them only to give it to others. Health care rationing may be inevitable at the point in time, but if we are going to do that (and we already are), we should do it openly and fairly. I think our current system of health care is unethical and inhumane. We are behind the times, the health of our population is declining, our infant mortality rate is higher than it should be, our life expectancy is lower than it should be, many are without adequate access to health care, big business is tell us how to treat our patients, and our current system ranks something like 37th in the world.

That 50 million number is very indiscriminate and transitional. Those are not the same people year after year. They are the one's between jobs or those who don't feel they need it. The small minority of that number that actually don't have access to health insurance are already getting a free medicare/aid ride. Our current system is only unethical in that we force some to pay and we give it free to others. Life is not fair. The best healthcare solution is open it across state borders and to the free market. I personally have great insurance, but I don't need it. If it were up to me I would be under a catastrophic plan similar to car insurance. I don't mind paying for yearly physicals. Along the same lines, I don't expect my car insurance to pay for oil changes.

That's just my humble opinion. Some politicians look for a problem where there really isn't one just to rally support derived from sympathy.

 

[scpod]

People should have the "right" to access the healthcare provider of their choice. In other words, no one should be able to tell you where you have to go for health care. However, you still have to pay for it. You can't call something a "right" if in giving it to someone you infringe on the "rights" of others. If you give someone free healthcare, then someone else is being forced to pay for it-- usually against their will. Honestly, I don't want to be paying for everyone else to have healthcare, but that's exactly what is happening with the taxes that I'm paying. Part of the rason I want to be a doctor is because I want to spend some time in undereserved areas where healthcare is limited and/or simply unaffordable. But, that is something I want to do of my own free will, not something I'm forced to do.

 

[lilzelda2]

That's just my humble opinion. Some politicians look for a problem where there really isn't one just to rally support derived from sympathy.

Are you for real? 😱

A majority of the people are not in between jobs but are instead unable to afford insurance premiums because they don't make enough money and can't quailfy for finacial assitance through government because they make too much. I don't know if anyone has looked at the scales for qualifying for medicaid but you have to be jack-broke to get accepted. Imagine making 35,000 yr then having a kid and paying your rent/mort. then throwing in an extra 4000 per person to get insurance, its not easy but to a young person without kids it looks easy hell, if I can afford it then that family can to.

Having health insurance is a right. If your sick you should be able to see a doctor, everyone deserves a right to life. Its like saying the fire department should only go to someones house if they can afford to pay them, or put out the fire in manision before you even think about the fire in the projects.

Everyone deserves access to care regardless of their race,sex and socioeconomic background.

 

[homeboy]

The problem with debating healthcare being a right vs a privilege is that its fiscal burden on society is EXPONENTIALLY greater than that of any other aspect of life, and this is directly proportional to the technology it is associated with.

Why is it just for me to smoke 2 packs/day, live a crappy lifestyle and develop COPD, and expect my fellow Americans to pitch in for all my hospital stays for acute exacerbations and my eventual lung CA tx?

The logic is because we spend billions of dollars on research/technology for the sole purpose of treating those conditions, so it’s expected that if there’s a treatment, it should be available to all.

And when we say ‘right,’ are we talking our right as a human or our right as an American? I think healthcare being a human right sounds a bit too idealistic / utopian to be plausible.

...and saying our system ranks “37th” is meaningless unless you know the standards & parameters used to make the rank, not to mention the complexity of cases and treatments.

 

[homeboy]

Are you for real? 😱

A majority of the people are not in between jobs but are instead unable to afford insurance premiums because they don't make enough money and can't quailfy for finacial assitance through government because they make too much.

Uninsured breakdown: 47 million - (10 million with household incomes of >75,000) - (14 million eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP) = ~24 million, not counting the 1/3 of Hispanics identified in the 2006 census who are uninsured, or those in between jobs.

 

[167649]

The problem with debating healthcare being a right vs a privilege is that its fiscal burden on society is EXPONENTIALLY greater than that of any other aspect of life, and this is directly proportional to the technology it is associated with.

Why is it just for me to smoke 2 packs/day, live a crappy lifestyle and develop COPD, and expect my fellow Americans to pitch in for all my hospital stays for acute exacerbations and my eventual lung CA tx?

The logic is because we spend billions of dollars on research/technology for the sole purpose of treating those conditions, so it's expected that if there's a treatment, it should be available to all.

And when we say ‘right,' are we talking our right as a human or our right as an American? I think healthcare being a human right sounds a bit too idealistic / utopian to be plausible.

...and saying our system ranks "37th" is meaningless unless you know the standards & parameters used to make the rank, not to mention the complexity of cases and treatments.

You never really state where you stand on it, but I get the picture you think something should be a right only if is cheap. Fair enough.

But most people fail to realize something about the financial aspect of all this. Having 47 million uninsured people in this country slams our economy and does far more damage to our markets and ability to effectively compete in the international economy than the direct cost of insuring everybody. Many experts now predict that if we could insure everybody, rather than shift the cost of uninsured hospital care to the economy (as we currently do) we would actually save money, a great deal of it. People get so worked up about "I don't want to pay for someone else's problems." But since they don't fully understand this side of it they fail to reazlize that they already do, albeit terribly inefficiently.

So the sole argument that healthcare should not be a right only because it is expensive is not as solid as you would think.

 

[look4wisdom]

This is a tough issue and I do not see a consensus being reached in the near future. I do not have insurance myself but I also do not expect anyone else to contribute to my healthcare costs. I am very wary of giving the government additional control over my life and personal decisions. You really like dealing with the IRS or Social Security Administration? I dont. No way do I want the government to deduct from my check for some nationwide administered health program. Name one area the gov is involved in that has not become a red tape nightmare. And since resources, healthcare included, are limited, how are they going to distribute those resources to the masses? I have a feeling that those with "preventable problems" like obesity, smoking or alcohol related disease, among many others will be the first to feel the hammer drop on them. Now all this isn't to say I dont feel our present system isnot in need of reform, it most definitely is. However, national healthcare is not a panacea that will right all the wrongs and heal all the people, as much as those on the left would like us to believe.

 

[Jack Daniel]

You never really state where you stand on it, but I get the picture you think something should be a right only if is cheap. Fair enough.

But most people fail to realize something about the financial aspect of all this. Having 47 million uninsured people in this country slams our economy and does far more damage to our markets and ability to effectively compete in the international economy than the direct cost of insuring everybody. Many experts now predict that if we could insure everybody, rather than shift the cost of uninsured hospital care to the economy (as we currently do) we would actually save money, a great deal of it. People get so worked up about "I don't want to pay for someone else's problems." But since they don't fully understand this side of it they fail to reazlize that they already do, albeit terribly inefficiently.

So the sole argument that healthcare should not be a right only because it is expensive is not as solid as you would think.

Preach it, brother, preach it. 👍

 

[homeboy]

So the sole argument that healthcare should not be a right only because it is expensive is not as solid as you would think.

I never said rights are inextricably tied to cost, you did. What I DID imply is that you can’t look at healthcare in an egalitarian vacuum, no matter how good it sounds to suggest healthcare rights trump the cost issue.

And like I said, the 47 million is a misnomer.

In any case, everyone having a "health insurance card" means nothing without access. Physicians in the greater Boston area uniformly closed their doors because they couldn't handle the influx of new patients when Gov. Romney instituted his plan.

 

[It'sElectric]

Just because the technology has changed over the past two hundred years does not mean that the responsiblity of a physician has. Life is not a commodity and as such, physicians take on the responsibility of caring for the poor, the needy, the sick, etc. If you don't think that it is an "unalienable right", then why are you following a career that is designed to give people that very necesity? When you take the oath to become a physician, believe it or not, you agree to provide health-care to all, not with the stipulation that if you are not compensated sufficiently you will turn patients away. Go into medicine for the right reasons, and not for capitalism upon human lives.

After reading your shortsighted, idealistic post, is it any wonder that the government and public at large continues to try and reduce physician salaries year after year?? There's a big difference between "capitalism upon human lives" and being properly compensated.

Food, clothing, shelter are all privileges, so why should "free" (that term makes me laugh every time) health care suddenly be a right?

Personally, the most amusing thing about this entire issue is that people will gladly shell out $200/month for cable and internet and thousands of dollars on various other forms of leisure (boating, fishing, hunting, eating out, etc.), yet when it comes time to budget money for health insurance, they're suddenly strapped for cash.

I'm all in favor of a sliding scale where health insurance is provided at lower rates to lower income families using tax money that is already being used to compensate hospitals for taking on uninsured patients, but I will never, ever accept "Universal Health Care". Complete and utter garbage. It has been shown time and again that people show very little value for something (and thus abuse it) that they have no real investment in.

 

[homeboy]

After reading your shortsighted, idealistic post, is it any wonder that the government and public at large continues to try and reduce physician salaries year after year?? There's a big difference between "capitalism upon human lives" and being properly compensated.

Food, clothing, shelter are all privileges, so why should "free" (that term makes me laugh every time) health care suddenly be a right?

Personally, the most amusing thing about this entire issue is that people will gladly shell out $200/month for cable and internet and thousands of dollars on various other forms of leisure (boating, fishing, hunting, eating out, etc.), yet when it comes time to budget money for health insurance, they're suddenly strapped for cash.

I'm all in favor of a sliding scale where health insurance is provided at lower rates to lower income families using tax money that is already being used to compensate hospitals for taking on uninsured patients, but I will never, ever accept "Universal Health Care". Complete and utter garbage. It has been shown time and again that people show very little value for something (and thus abuse it) that they have no real investment in.

Well said.

 

[ShyRem]

I think it depends what you call "health care". If by "health care" you mean access to physicians when you are sick, then yes. And you should have to pay an amount within reason (depending on your income and make payment arrangements). No one should be turned away because of lack of cash up front for necessary health care.

However, if by "health care" you mean going to your plastic surgeon because your breasts are too small, your butt too big, you hate getting old and having wrinkles, or that non-existent bump on your nose is driving you nuts (but no one else can see it), then NO, it's NOT a right. And you should have to pay a premium price for every single bit of necessary health care if you can afford a plastic surgeon for non-essential care. Caveat: trauma or cancer reconstruction is a different story and doesn't fall into this category.

 

[medhacker]

Since when can the majority of the truly poor of our country afford high-scale cable service and elective cosmetic procedures? 🙄

Would like to see proof of that...

 

[It'sElectric]

Since when can the majority of the truly poor of our country afford high-scale cable service and elective cosmetic procedures? 🙄

Would like to see proof of that...

For the record, I never once mentioned "plastic surgery" in my rant, so please don't lump my post with others.

The "truly poor" of our country are in fact eligible for "free" health care, so I'm in no way making reference to them. I'm referring to the vast majority of the truly uninsured (ineligible for Medicaid). If you don't think this is accurate, then you're oblivious to what the American society has become.

 

[medhacker]

For the record, I never once mentioned "plastic surgery" in my rant, so please don't lump my post with others.

The "truly poor" of our country are in fact eligible for "free" health care, so I'm in no way making reference to them. I'm referring to the vast majority of the truly uninsured (ineligible for Medicaid). If you don't think this is accurate, then you're oblivious to what the American society has become.

aren't you a bundle of joy? 😍

I didn't do anything to your post (emphasis on the "your" part) I only expressed my overall opinion

If you don't think this is accurate, then you're oblivious to what the American society has become.

my my, what an example of a non-opinionated member of our glorious american society... 🙄

The portion of our society elegible for medicaid are not the "truly poor", those elegibile are considered to live in "extreme poverty" or penury.

 

[It'sElectric]

I didn't do anything to your post (emphasis on the "your" part) I only expressed my overall opinion

But you did essentially lump my post with another, as I stated previously.

my my, what an example of a non-opinionated member of our glorious american society... 🙄

ok...

The portion of our society elegible for medicaid are not the "truly poor", those elegibile are considered to live in "extreme poverty" or penury.

So now we're getting into semantics. Lawyer in a former life??

 

[speeter]

Are you for real? 😱

A majority of the people are not in between jobs but are instead unable to afford insurance premiums because they don't make enough money and can't quailfy for finacial assitance through government because they make too much. I don't know if anyone has looked at the scales for qualifying for medicaid but you have to be jack-broke to get accepted. Imagine making 35,000 yr then having a kid and paying your rent/mort. then throwing in an extra 4000 per person to get insurance, its not easy but to a young person without kids it looks easy hell, if I can afford it then that family can to.

Having health insurance is a right. If your sick you should be able to see a doctor, everyone deserves a right to life. Its like saying the fire department should only go to someones house if they can afford to pay them, or put out the fire in manision before you even think about the fire in the projects.

Everyone deserves access to care regardless of their race,sex and socioeconomic background.

If you want the real statistics read the book "The Cure" by David Gratzer. Those 50 million people might not be who you think they are. Hillcare proposes that we raise the line for medicaid to 400% of the poverty level! Are you telling me that someone making 80k a year cannot afford insurance? Sure, someone making 35k a year can't afford the best insurance, but they can afford a catastrophic plan with prescription coverage. Besides, at 35k a year with children you would qualify for state assistance.

 

[t-funk]

If you want the real statistics read the book "The Cure" by David Gratzer. Those 50 million people might not be who you think they are. Hillcare proposes that we raise the line for medicaid to 400% of the poverty level! Are you telling me that someone making 80k a year cannot afford insurance? Sure, someone making 35k a year can't afford the best insurance, but they can afford a catastrophic plan with prescription coverage. Besides, at 35k a year with children you would qualify for state assistance.

In my state, you're looking more at the mid to upper 20s for a family of 4 in order to qualify for any sort of assistance. I think that's relatively universal and is the reason why a lot of people will pick 30,000 to 40,000 when giving examples of people who are working but still can't really afford the essentials.

 

[Ferrismonk]

It seems we're slipping away from the original question. Is healthcare a right or privilege? Perhaps it is implicit in the question, but nowhere is cost or money mentioned. When approached from this viewpoint we can get more to the core of the question. Do people have an inherent right to receive healthcare? Phrased this way I'd say no, people do not have an inherent right to receive healthcare. They do, however, have an inherent right to be healthy. It basically comes down to whose responsibility is it to ensure we have the opportunity to have good health. I'll give a couple examples to help explain the difference.

Let's say that your only option after hurricane Katrina is to live in a FEMA trailer with toxic levels of VOCs in the air. Let's say also that you have breathing problems as a direct result from these compounds. This is infringing upon your right to be healthy.

Now let's say that you've been been shooting heroin for a number of years now, but it just feels too good to quit for long. Then you are told that you have hepatitis and that your only chance to live is if you get a liver transplant. Do you have a right to receive that $320,000 liver? Nobody made you do what caused your problem. In fact, the government tried very hard to get you to stop. Certainly if you have an extra $320K laying around you have the privilege of trying to buy one, but you don't have a right to that liver.

When you add finances into the mix this becomes a lot more emotional, but in my opinion those who espouse universal healthcare as a solution either have never worked in healthcare or just don't seem to understand government very well. Medicare is probably the insurance plan with the most red tape and loops to jump through that there is. If you've ever had to fight with an insurance company before you know how rediculous that is. If universal healthcare ever takes hold it is simply going to be an expanded medicare system, red tape and government inefficiency at it's best. Secondly, just because the government is "providing" health insurance, doesn't mean that they are doing you any favors. Where does government get it's money from? You and me (and to a lesser extent the Chinese). Are you willing to pay an extra 16% in taxes (the percentage of GDP healthcare uses up) so that the government can give you half that back to pay for your doctor visit? The only good point of universal healthcare in my point is that us doctors will actually get paid versus just absorbing the cost of treating people who can't/won't pay for their doctor visits.

In my humble opinion, the best solution is already available. Just buy a cheap high deductible health plan and stock tax-free money away in an HSA. This greatly reduces the government/insurance inefficiencies while allowing you to get whatever you want done pretty much whenever you want. If you keep yourself healthy you have a nice little nest egg set aside for retirement, if you run into serious health problems, you pay your high deductible and then insurance will pick up the tab.

Now all this being said, as a physician I intend to provide my services regardless of my patient's ability to pay, but that is my choice as a person and not a right of the patient.

 

[homeboy]

Good post, monk, and I agree with most of it, but have an issue with the notion that "...[everyone has] an inherent right to be healthy."

What's considered healthy and who determines it? Is 20/20 vision healthy? Absolutely pain free all the time? No dental complaints? Is it an infringment of my natural rights to have a genetic disorder?

I understand your second stipulation about 'opportunity,' but cringe at the notion that being healthy is a natural right.

 

[Lokhtar]

Having insurance is important - but what about those people who are rejected? My uncle had cancer and his insurance refused to pay for it due to some bureaucracy, and he had to sell everything he had, including his house to pay for treatment. Now, insurance companies are for-profit businesses, and they are obviously in it to make money. But we have to decide, as a society, to figure out if we're going to let people die for such reasons or not.

 

[HCE]

Medicare is probably the insurance plan with the most red tape and loops to jump through that there is. If you've ever had to fight with an insurance company before you know how rediculous that is.

My general impression is that, actually, Medicare has been quite successful, and is more efficient than the various private insurance plans. I have not heard of any significant number of Medicare-eligible folks screaming for the elimination of Medicare in favor of a system run by private insurers.

 

[Tired]

Right or privelege? What?

It's a commodity. Like a car, or a table.

 

[speeter]

It seems we're slipping away from the original question. Is healthcare a right or privilege? Perhaps it is implicit in the question, but nowhere is cost or money mentioned. When approached from this viewpoint we can get more to the core of the question. Do people have an inherent right to receive healthcare? Phrased this way I'd say no, people do not have an inherent right to receive healthcare. They do, however, have an inherent right to be healthy. It basically comes down to whose responsibility is it to ensure we have the opportunity to have good health. I'll give a couple examples to help explain the difference.

Let's say that your only option after hurricane Katrina is to live in a FEMA trailer with toxic levels of VOCs in the air. Let's say also that you have breathing problems as a direct result from these compounds. This is infringing upon your right to be healthy.

Now let's say that you've been been shooting heroin for a number of years now, but it just feels too good to quit for long. Then you are told that you have hepatitis and that your only chance to live is if you get a liver transplant. Do you have a right to receive that $320,000 liver? Nobody made you do what caused your problem. In fact, the government tried very hard to get you to stop. Certainly if you have an extra $320K laying around you have the privilege of trying to buy one, but you don't have a right to that liver.

When you add finances into the mix this becomes a lot more emotional, but in my opinion those who espouse universal healthcare as a solution either have never worked in healthcare or just don't seem to understand government very well. Medicare is probably the insurance plan with the most red tape and loops to jump through that there is. If you've ever had to fight with an insurance company before you know how rediculous that is. If universal healthcare ever takes hold it is simply going to be an expanded medicare system, red tape and government inefficiency at it's best. Secondly, just because the government is "providing" health insurance, doesn't mean that they are doing you any favors. Where does government get it's money from? You and me (and to a lesser extent the Chinese). Are you willing to pay an extra 16% in taxes (the percentage of GDP healthcare uses up) so that the government can give you half that back to pay for your doctor visit? The only good point of universal healthcare in my point is that us doctors will actually get paid versus just absorbing the cost of treating people who can't/won't pay for their doctor visits.

In my humble opinion, the best solution is already available. Just buy a cheap high deductible health plan and stock tax-free money away in an HSA. This greatly reduces the government/insurance inefficiencies while allowing you to get whatever you want done pretty much whenever you want. If you keep yourself healthy you have a nice little nest egg set aside for retirement, if you run into serious health problems, you pay your high deductible and then insurance will pick up the tab.

Now all this being said, as a physician I intend to provide my services regardless of my patient's ability to pay, but that is my choice as a person and not a right of the patient.

I'm proud to call Travis a future classmate.

 

[scpod]

...I have not heard of any significant number of Medicare-eligible folks screaming for the elimination of Medicare in favor of a system run by private insurers.

Of course not. THEY aren't the ones paying for it. People who get free stuff rarely complain about it.

 

[DannMann99]

Having health insurance is a right. If your sick you should be able to see a doctor, everyone deserves a right to life. Its like saying the fire department should only go to someones house if they can afford to pay them, or put out the fire in manision before you even think about the fire in the projects.

I like this idea lilzelda, as every fire dept. outside of a major city is volunteer. Now we can have volunteer Doc's!

Can't wait to spend 200k $ on education to do my work for free!!!
who's with me?


-

On a serious note, I'm anti-universal healthcare. I know in the future i'll be successful enough to afford healthcare on my own (because I am not lame) and I know I would be beyond pissed if a family member died waiting on surgery.

Read up on the pitfalls of UHC in other countries... its scary.

A quick google search yielded: http://www.onthefencefilms.com/video/deadmeat/deadmeat.html

check it out

 

[HCE]

Of course not. THEY aren't the ones paying for it. People who get free stuff rarely complain about it.

I think you're confusing Medicare with Medicaid. If you have ever had a job and you see the government grabbing that FICA amount out of your check, well, you're paying towards your Medicare down the road. Medicaid is the needs-based, "free stuff" to which you refer. Calling Medicare "free stuff" would be like calling Social Security free.

 

[Ferrismonk]

Good post, monk, and I agree with most of it, but have an issue with the notion that "...[everyone has] an inherent right to be healthy."

What's considered healthy and who determines it? Is 20/20 vision healthy? Absolutely pain free all the time? No dental complaints? Is it an infringment of my natural rights to have a genetic disorder?

I understand your second stipulation about 'opportunity,' but cringe at the notion that being healthy is a natural right.

You have a good point. Who decides what is fair when it comes to things not in our control? It is my belief that that God has a reason for everything, perhaps we have genetic disorders to teach us something about ourselves and how we relate to the world. Who knows? The point I was trying to make is that nobody should be allowed to negatively impact your health without your consent/control, not that you are guaranteed to be 100% "healthy".

I have not heard of any significant number of Medicare-eligible folks screaming for the elimination of Medicare in favor of a system run by private insurers.

The people that receive the benefits of medicare usually aren't concerned how efficient it is. What they care about is that they get the care they need when they need it. Who cares if the procedure cost the government $450 when it should only have cost $100, what does it matter if the doctor's office spent 2 hours next to the fax machine to get paid for my $7 lab test? It's not coming out of my pocket.

I'm proud to call Travis a future classmate.

😀!

 

[predodoc]

My opinion has been said before but I think that heath care is a right only if you have the means to pay for it. It’s the people who say they want FREE healthcare that tick me off. Nothing is Free. Most people would agree there is a right to food and shelter, but you would get arrested if you went into a store and just took what you needed. Or just went up to a builder and said it’s my right to have housing so it’s my right for you to build me a house for Free.

Doctors have rights too. Tehy Should have the right to say I’m not treating you if you don’t pay. But should not have the right to discriminate against a paying patient just because who they are.

 

[look4wisdom]

HCE is right. Every worker helps to pay for Medicare with FICA contributions. However, those of us paying in now are getting the shaft when you consider the amount we will have payed in versus our return compared with the baby boomer generation. As has been pointed out with social security is is not going to be viable forever without significant chages, read reduction of benefits. Our elected represenatives have spent those funds to balance past budgets. I see no reason to believe that if a new universal healthcare pot of money turns up they wont be dipping into it as well for things other than healthcare.

 

[scpod]

...well, you're paying towards your Medicare down the road. Medicaid is the needs-based, "free stuff" to which you refer....

No, I'm actually paying for everyone else's Medicare today. There's no guarantee that Medicare will be there if and when I become elligible. When I do become elligible, the people that are younger than me will be paying for it then. Do you really believe that the paltry sum that my dad contributed is paying for his care now?

 

[It'sElectric]

I think you're confusing Medicare with Medicaid. If you have ever had a job and you see the government grabbing that FICA amount out of your check, well, you're paying towards your Medicare down the road. Medicaid is the needs-based, "free stuff" to which you refer. Calling Medicare "free stuff" would be like calling Social Security free.

As people have already pointed out...grossly, grossly inaccurate. We will never see a dime of our social security and it's more than likely we'll also never see a dime of the money we're paying towards health care for others right now.

 

[Playmakur42]

I had my own business before deciding to go to med school & I've done business w/ both government entities & private sector companies. My point of reference is similiar to what it would be for doctors under UHC, a self employed person getting paid by the govt for services rendered.

I can say, without reservation, that government entities are exponentially less efficient than private sector ventures. I can give about 100 real examples I've experienced, but don't want to clutter the thread.

Just because the current system has faults now, doesn't mean that it should be thrown in the trash and completely run by the govt. I hope to see some real attempts to make insurance more affordable before such a massive overhaul of the system is ventured. Group purchasing power needs to be tapped here - insurance companies are very profitable, so there is room to negotiate if a group brings enough buying power to the table.

I do support some sort of health voucher system for those who truly cannot provide for themselves, but if caught taking advantage of the system I also would support a 10 year ban. Entitlement program users should also have drug tests - if they can afford drugs, they can afford health insurance.

 

[predodoc]

I had my own business before deciding to go to med school & I've done business w/ both government entities & private sector companies. My point of reference is similiar to what it would be for doctors under UHC, a self employed person getting paid by the govt for services rendered.

I can say, without reservation, that government entities are exponentially less efficient than private sector ventures. I can give about 100 real examples I've experienced, but don't want to clutter the thread.

Just because the current system has faults now, doesn't mean that it should be thrown in the trash and completely run by the govt. I hope to see some real attempts to make insurance more affordable before such a massive overhaul of the system is ventured. Group purchasing power needs to be tapped here - insurance companies are very profitable, so there is room to negotiate if a group brings enough buying power to the table.

I do support some sort of health voucher system for those who truly cannot provide for themselves, but if caught taking advantage of the system I also would support a 10 year ban. Entitlement program users should also have drug tests - if they can afford drugs, they can afford health insurance.

I agree about the gov't being less efficient. My girlfriend works for the CDC but hired through another company that does nothing but collect 10% of her paycheck. She says they do that with lots of people. A smart company would fire the middle man and give the employee a 5% bonus or even nothing at all. Also, she says that most of the division she works with are so lazy. They come in late and leave early and half dont show on fridays. They follow almost an honor system on working 40 hours. Nobody is a hardass about it because they themselves want to be lazy and the boss above them is the same way and so on. I wouldnt want my medical care system to be run like that.

 

[Jack Daniel]

I agree about the gov't being less efficient. My girlfriend works for the CDC but hired through another company that does nothing but collect 10% of her paycheck. She says they do that with lots of people. A smart company would fire the middle man and give the employee a 5% bonus or even nothing at all. Also, she says that most of the division she works with are so lazy. They come in late and leave early and half dont show on fridays. They follow almost an honor system on working 40 hours. Nobody is a hardass about it because they themselves want to be lazy and the boss above them is the same way and so on. I wouldnt want my medical care system to be run like that.

There is another way to interpret this. The CDC knows that it's difficult to remove people from a government position. If they use contracted companies to supply their HR needs, they probably have more control over who can work and for how long.

 

[look4wisdom]

Just wanted to say that its nice to see some other voices of reason and rationality speaking up. You all give me some hope for the future... Some I believe Ill see at MSUCOM in June

 

[scpod]

There is another way to interpret this. The CDC knows that it's difficult to remove people from a government position. If they use contracted companies to supply their HR needs, they probably have more control over who can work and for how long.

They also don't have to pay them benefits (like insurance) or give them holidays and vacations. Those things are usually worth well more than 10% of your salary.

 

[Caboose]

Not a right. Health Insurance was created during wartime to present incentives to workers during wage freezes. Since then having insurance has made people feel as though it was a simple trip to the doc for $10 and they were out with their magical pill they wanted to ease the immense pain of a hangnail. It's all about money, not rights. A trivial trip to the doc like that does not cost $10 - who picks up the slack? Those dirty insurance companies... course, they're in a business making money, so....

Having the "right" to healthcare would be like having the right to free oil and gas. You wouldn't give a rat's if it costs $3,000 to fill your tank because you don't feel it. You drive across the country and assume it's a right - after all, you needed to go from Texas to Canada for your right to that used futon. Prices shoot out our... ears because there is no supply/demand model to keep them in check. As doctors, we have to pay a lot more to run our practice because we have to deal with more paperwork and companies who know that we will be paid by the insurance companies and raise their prices because they can. Yes, there are a lot of services that cost a bajillion dollars and for that I can see having insurance as being very necessary. A liver transplant is more than my student loans.

I hear politicians promise all this healthcare business these days and vomit uncontrollably at inopportune times, such as in elevators on old women as I think about the speeches claiming free healthcare, education, lower taxes, etc. Yeaaahh... and how exactly would that be done? I'm sure I'll get taxed like nobody's business when I get out of school and attempt to pay off debt, start a family, buy a house... Say, if healthcare is a right, then it must be a right to have food and shelter too. Can someone pay a yearly fee on your income and help me out with that?

Thanks.

That's my 10 cents, (due to inflation). I am surprised you made it through this rant - well done.

Caboose.