OPINION: Is health care worth caring about?
It looks as though the battle over health care is finally over.
Sure, the Republican presidential candidates talk about repealing the bill, but realistically none of them have a shot at defeating the incumbent come 2012, and once Obama leaves office, the window of opportunity will be closed.
Retrospectively, though, was Obama’s health care bill the right thing for America? No, it wasn’t. “Obamacare” attempts to solve a problem without addressing what actually causes it.
The problem was simple and almost universally accepted: health care in the U.S. was too expensive. Before examining what caused the problem, let’s take a look at this claim.
The notion that the price of health care is a problem rests upon the idea that access to health care is a human right. If access to health care is not a right, then it is just another product on the market, and there is nothing morally wrong with it being too expensive for some to afford. We do not pass legislation to ensure everyone gets cable television, because no one has an intrinsic right to it, and there is nothing morally wrong with it being outside some individuals’ budgets.
Health care, however, is not cable. Too often I have heard my right-wing colleagues profess that health care is not a right. Those that buy into this idea are clearly unfamiliar with the Hippocratic Oath.
The market elevated health care costs to unbelievable heights. To say that access to it should solely be determined by the market, and that it’s no different than cable service, is a degradation to human life.
Health care was an issue, and some form of intervention was needed.
One of the primary causes of health care’s outrageous cost was simple greed — greed in the form of malpractice lawsuits. One study at a New York hospital found fewer than 2 percent of patients injured due to negligence filed a malpractice claim. Of the claims that were filed, expert reviewers found there was, in fact, no clear evidence of negligence or even injury in most of the suits.
Other studies linked malpractice suits directly with how much a doctor talks to a patient and whether or not the patient perceives the physician as friendly. In other words, people generally don’t sue because they were treated with negligence. They sue because they don’t like their doctor and are looking for a free check.
This greed drives up the cost of health care for everyone. Because hospitals are forced into paying unnecessary legal fees and writing checks to people who don’t deserve them, they need to charge a higher price.
The solution is simple. Allow informed patients to waive the right to sue for a discount on medical services. Clearly, there are many issues with this solution and parameters must be set, but there is no reason why two consenting parties shouldn’t be able to make such a contract.
Another problem lies with those that are homeless and struggle with alcoholism or other drug abuse, or some form of mental retardation. It is not uncommon for such people to wrack up medical bills worth hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars.
Of course, they don’t end up paying these bills — the public does. It would be cheaper for everyone to invest in programs that care for or help such individuals get back on their feet.
It amazes me how simple some of the most complex problems are. If we were all a little less greedy and a little more caring, health care would have never been an issue.