A Radically Simple Idea About Health Care
So it seems to me that almost everyone agrees on the following issues within the recent health care debate. Firstly, we have among the best treatment options on the planet. Secondly, the application of those treatments is neither efficient nor even-handed. Thirdly, cost is the root of the majority of issues within the health care system. While I will not pretend to be smart enough to have thoroughly vetted my own idea, I maintain that I can at least show that other perspectives and possibilities can exist.
When considering the value of constant advancement in the field of medicine, it seems self-evident to me that competition is the key to maintaining this current luxury. Not surprisingly, I believe this is most easily achieved through free-market principles. I’m wasting your time to explain why; for you either agree or disagree already on such a core principle. Suffice to say that if personal profit through company or salary advancement is the payoff instead of a civil servant job that is safe from all but nuclear war, I think the former will provide a better ROI every time.
We need to expand the access to health care dramatically. Okay, everyone still agrees with me so far at least. One of the ways I think we can accomplish this is through education. Far too often, in my experience, emergency rooms are filled with people that have a child with the sniffles, or a bloody nose, or some other issue that with proper education could be solved at home. There are two main factors in promoting healthy self reliance. The first one is the doctor-patient relationship where comfort, confidence, and knowledge should come from. This relationship will be improved by the changes I show later in the system of commerce. The second factor concerns finding the proper impetus for people to seek self-reliance in the first place. If we can empower the vast majority with the purchasing power of their own health care, we can incorporate such a system of financial incentives with little effort. In short, we can dramatically improve our health care system by simply improving our usage of it.
In order to enjoy 21st century medical care, we need to find a new way to deliver the services in order to shift our dollars away from overhead costs and funnel more to the treatments and providers directly. We also need to enlarge the pool containing financial contributors, those who pay for their health care. Another worthy goal is improving the doctor-patient relationship. Improving this relationship will mean both an increase in the depth of the relationship as well as the higher quality delivery of services arising from true compassion and trust. As a military dependant and also a person of far too many broken bones and asthma-related incidents, I saw first hand the kind of health care provided by a government system. I will never forget my first trip to a civilian hospital for care and the resulting shock that it could be so much more efficient. Everyone should get the latter form of care in my opinion simply because it is better in my experience. It is with these goals in mind that I offer the following thoughts and suggestions.
My main thought is this, we waste hundreds of millions (billions most likely) paying for a system designed to do nothing more than pay our doctors for us. When you strip it all away, that is what you get. We are asked to pay into a system whether we need it or not at the time, and in return they will pay PART of the bill down the line, as long as they agree you need the treatment and qualify for it. Oh, and then they can raise your rates or dump you if you cost too much, or even look like you will down the road. I should stop here to point out that I’m writing this without considering the changes implemented by Obama Care. So why don’t we find a better way to pay for all this health care without all the bureaucratic waste and none-sense? Well that is what I am suggesting and it certainly doesn’t include funneling our money through the idiotic and wasteful entity we call our Federal Government.
Why can’t we purchase our health care directly from the hospital or doctor? Really, think about it. I think it can work. This can be accomplished in several different ways. Hospitals could simply offer monthly payment packages that include a certain set of standard features much like choosing channel packages when buying cable TV. Savings accounts could also be offered to encourage a down-payment on future high-cost treatments that are unexpected. Instead of offering earnings through interest, hospitals could offer different levels of a discount when using those funds in the future. The more operating capital you “loan” the hospital, the less they charge you when you spend the funds from that account. For the wealthy, this means they can set themselves up for life by simply setting aside a portion of their wealth ahead of time directly into the system now. For the poor, that means they can finally afford to buy essential services without breaking the bank. I would even suggest that such a system would lead us back to the times when doctors or hospitals could afford to deal on a case-by-case basis with those that couldn’t even afford a payment plan for basic services. When you consider the amount of actual visits the average person makes, the idea that nearly 100% of your payments each month would be spent on the few visits made, it isn’t hard to imagine a mere $20.00 per month going further than your funds do now. Even in this utopian world, I realize that we have people that still couldn’t afford even the cheapest plan offered. My whole point revolves around the fact that we can drastically improve the efficiency of our system, which means the charitable donations we currently have in the system could be allowed to reach more people in a more effective way. Where are the best systems for child cancer care now for instance? Typically most people agree that it is found within the St. Jude clinics, both private institutions dependent upon charitable contributions. I have the utmost faith that our country will always take care of our poor when allowed to do so without interference. This is how it used to be and it can be again. Within a system of direct payment to the hospital an atmosphere of competition will sprout between local hospitals. This competition will lead to a performance based system when it comes to the direct delivery of health care. No longer will staff be kept when underperforming. I dare say that without the paper-work and second guessing involved with our health insurance industry, our health professionals would enjoy their jobs again as well. Hospitals would be directly accountable to the citizens of its city or town since payments aren’t coming from across the nation, signed by a person that has never been in the hospital. Now I realize there are a lot of issues I haven’t addressed. For the most part, that is due to the desire to find brevity after already asking you to read two pages. I’ll briefly touch on a couple of those in an attempt to provide at least a guide as to how I think some of them could be addressed. As far as funding the expensive equipment needed for diagnosis such as CT scanners I think a combination of donations, hospital resource pooling and even a secondary industry for such services can address this need. For the issue of rural health care needs I would merely clarify that I am not against large companies being involved in our system. I have no objection to having a chain store basic health service clinic in the corner strip-mall. I also have no objection to a person or company owning multiple hospitals in order to provide care centers for rural needs. Finally, I do believe our local, state, and federal governments do have a role to play in this scenario. They alone can protect our rights during commerce, so they must be involved. For instance, they would have to enforce anti-trust laws in order to prevent any one entity from dominating the market and price-gouging. They could provide freedoms such as moving your savings to a new hospital without severe penalty in order to keep hospitals from leveraging your account against you. A state or local government could provide, through a proposition directly voted on by the people, funds to assist those in need according to the will of the people in that city or state. We MUST avoid federal involvement here. They can never be allowed to touch our money simply because it isn’t their right, not to mention it would signal a return to an inefficient system. It simply isn’t legal or fair to ask a state like Alaska to contribute to the health care needs of New York or Massachusetts. The state level is as far as any social program should go if we want to stay effective, respect our nation’s political structure, and keep overhead loss to a minimum. I think private donations would INCREASE in a system such as I am suggesting and legislated financial support wouldn’t be needed in the first place. I invite everyone to offer their ideas, opinions and criticisms on this. I have thought of more detail to this idea to be sure, but as I said before, I have to let you go at some point. If you have a question or suggestion, please leave a comment and I’ll get back to you within a couple days.
For some of the government’s own numbers showing that public health care programs are less efficient than private ones, here is a quick fact list provided covering the national health care expenditures.
https://www.cms.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/25_NHE_Fact_Sheet.asp#TopOfPage
No comments:
Post a Comment