In case you missed it, the NY Times ran an editorial on Sunday,
World's Best Medical Care?.
I confess, for lack of a better word, that I always had very good medical care when I lived in the states, first through my parents, then because I could afford to maintain it while I was in law school, and finally through my own jobs. Now, because I reside in the UK, I am covered through the National Health Service (although I'll suspend my thoughts on how well the NHS is actually working these days for now) which is free at the point of service.
I've never been without excellent, dependable health care, health care that never required more than a reasonable co-pay, and I've certainly needed it over the years for my multiple knee surgeries, shattered elbow, emergency appendectomy, pregnancies, etc. But I am well aware of the fact that I am one of the lucky ones, especially in recent years when I watched my sister struggle to remain insured first when she needed to change jobs and then when she decided to take a year off to pursue a master's degree. It wasn't easy, and her insurance has been less than stellar, fighting with her over various charges, and requiring her to pay quite a bit out of pocket for necessary treatments, treatments that include medications to keep her asthma under control as well as her own emergency appendectomy.
I was also made well aware of my 'status' when, as I noted above, I shattered my elbow. It wasn't merely 'broken', it was 'shattered'. And it happened at a time when so many working people go without insurance, that 'interim' time in your twenties, between college and a good job with a good health plan. I was just out of university and had planned to work for a year before heading for law school. Instead I was in an accident, an accident that placed the use of my arm in permanent jeopardy. But, luckily for me, I had heeded my parents' warnings and took over the health care policy that had covered me from birth on an independent plan status. I say 'luckily' because I listened and I could afford it. I know many could not have. But the decision to pay for my health insurance out-of-pocket saved my arm, literally. When I asked the head of orthopedics what would have happened if I hadn't maintained my insurance, he was brutally honest, saying essentially: You would have ended up at a county hospital where they would have just gone in and pieced it together with hardware, released you after 5-7 days, and you would have had very limited use of your arm for the rest of your life. And that's assuming they didn't further damage the radial nerve that had already been damaged when they put the hardware in.
I was horrified. And relieved. Because I was so fortunate: I had multiple surgical procedures without actual cutting, six weeks in the hospital (in traction, by the way), and daily physical therapy when I finally got out for many weeks. Essentially, I was given the time, attention and resources that were needed to make the best recovery possible, a situation that was only afforded me because I had health insurance.
And I am fully aware that things like this, accidents like this, shouldn't have to come down to whether or not someone has health insurance.
I know it's 'only' an Editorial, but I really think it's worth a read, especially by those who are continuing to operate, as it states, "under the delusion that [Americans] have the best health care system in the world".
I agree that Americans do have stellar health care available, but only to the privileged.
And speaking of the privileged: Do we not employ and pay the salaries of the President and his administration? Do we not employ Congress? Why do we provide these people, our employees, people we put into office, with top-notch lifetime health care but not ourselves?
I think that's a question we should all be asking. And I think it's a question we should be asking our employees to remedy.
Oh, and on a side note, I would also like to point out that the NY Times has posted a number of letters to the Editor in response to Sunday's Editorial. It seems a lot of people are in agreement.
America needs a plan, a health insurance plan.
14 August 2007
A Sunday Not-So-Funny...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
A woman I know in Canada was released from the hospital after a six hour stay following a mastectomy. A MASTECTOMY. Because that's not major surgery at all.
Yeah, I have to say one of the reasons I'm glad we moved back when we did was because I was more comfortable with the (apparent - no actual research done) sort of care I expected to receive in the US when giving birth. Sure, it would have been free in Ireland, but it was also 4-6 mothers in a rather dingy room for recovery, not the nice, private room for labor, delivery, and recovery I enjoyed back here. I know that's not exactly the 'care,' but was an easy to see difference.
And when we got to bring Pumpkin to the emergency room twice in two months, well, I was glad I was here. And that they had a hand surgeon who came and sewed her little pinky back together. And now, other than a still slightly wonky fingernail that should grow straighter over time, you can't tell anything happened.
But, like you, I've always had good to decent insurance. My husband's isn't stellar right now, so we're getting to pay some small percentage on everything, but still... I feel like I'm seeing qualified people in quality facilities with up-to-date equipment.
... but if I hadn't had insurance... well, then I'd've been glad to get free-at-the-point-of-service care like in Ireland...
i see so many people without insurance. it breaks my heart.
While the Canadian Universal Health Care system is not perfect, it is great compared to the US system. The biggest problem we have is retention of Doctors - they can make more money and garner more prestige in the US than here.
I sometimes post on a US-based parenting website, and often people comment about trying for another child as soon as they've paid off the hospital bill (which can be as high as $20K) for the birth of their latest child. This astounds me. I can't imagine having to factor in cost when contemplating an epidural or another shot of demerol. It is scary.
I couldn't agree more. Yes, our country has wonderful medical interventions. Available only to those who can afford it, which is less than half of the populationa s a whole--probably less than that actually.
I enjoyed reading this article/post. And your post above this one--about naptime--how wonderful. I envy you.
Great post.
We are uninsured. Josh, BubTar, and I...none of us are medically insured. KayTar is. We had to give up our less-then-stellar coverage to get her on a plan that covers everything she needs without driving us to bankruptcy. We do not make enough to self-pay for high quality insurance for the entire family...but we make too much to qualify for assistance. Now KayTar's current insurer is closing the plan down, and we have to scramble for new insurance that may or may not cover her "pre-existing" conditions.
It is an important issue.
AMEN!!!
Great post on an ESSENTIAL topic.
I really agree.
Right now we use an HSA. This means we direct deposit the maximum each month and pay cash---out of pocket literally---for medical care.
You probably do not even want to know how much we've spent courtesy of my Dread Disease.
Allegedly once we hit a certain point, insurance is supposed to kick in 100%.
But somehow...nothing ever qualifies and we never seem to hit that level.
Next year, we'll have to opt out of this little gamble that was intended to save money but has instead nearly beggared us.
We'll have to opt in to traditional insurance which costs a TON.
It's so distressing that you either take a risk as we have (and it was such a careful risk, with a backup and savings), risk more with nothing, or pay through the nose if you are fortunate enough to be able to do that.
I don't know how we will. But we'll find a way.
Julie
Ravin' Picture Maven
Oh, I know this -- shattered elbow. For me it was a shattered leg. And I feel so, so lucky that I had good insurance. Because the cost of repairing the leg -- the hospital stays, the two major surgeries, the 6 months of PT, etc., etc., etc. was fifty thousand dollars.
Of which, because I had good insurance, I paid maybe two hundred and fifty dollars.
It's not fair that my leg is in better shape now than someone else's simply because I had a better insurance plan.
It's such a shame that we have such crappy insurance here.
I don't know if that scenario would be true in all health care settings in the US. I've worked in hospitals caring for many uninsured patients, and they never received substandard care in terms of needed procedures or physical therapy or operations. Perhaps because these have been academic hospitals affiliated with universities and not private hospitals but everywhere I have worked, it's what's best medically. No insurance? Then there will be bills. Insurance? Often they're breathing down our necks trying to deny stays, pressuring discharges, etc. I haven't met an insurance carrier yet who was all about the people and not their bottom line.
Oh, America SO needs a health plan--and something needs to be done about coverage for mental health, as well. It's appalling what's available to those with money, versus those without. Appalling.
Amen. It is very, very scary, and so sad to think of all the people who are one job or one pre-existing condition or one [whatever] away from insurance and therefore proper medical care.
you're singing my song, sister!
I'm always shocked to see that there are people in the US who go broke when they need major medical attention. Here in Germany we have been fuming over things like paying up to 10 € for a prescription. Here everybody has to have insurance. There are different ways of doing this but basically you get what you need. Including stay at the hospital as long as you need, physical therapy and such. Even people on welfare or with no income can have insurance. They must have in fact.
I find the US system barbaric.
As a consumer (with high income and good insurance) I find our system to be hard to navigate, inconsistent, and illogical. As an economist I find it to be an obvious case of market failure and cannot, for the life of me, figure out why we're so opposed to fixes that provide universal coverage. But, errr, as a statistically-minded person, I found the editorial to be a little lacking. Sure, it fired me up. And I do believe that we lag way behind lots of other countries. But I wonder if our mortality rates for, say transplants, isn't lower because maybe we're accepting higher risk patients in our system than those in other countries accept? I don't know this to be true. But in the world of infertility I've observed that the non-U.S. bloggers who have a low risk of success seem to be not covered by their systems.
PS-- Oh, and I was in school in Cuba in 1997 when one of my classmates developed a bad ear infection. The Cubans that we knew commented on how easy it was for her to get antibiotics with her American dollars and how hard it would have been if she hadn't had money. But that was 97, when Cuba was still recovering from the fall of the Soviet Union.
Why, oh, why don't I edit before posting? That should be "I wonder if our mortality rate isn't HIGHER."
We need universal health care here in the U.S. It shouldn't be a privilege, it should be a right and people shouldn't be burdened with bankruptcy to get it.
Between my 2 high risk pregnancies, I probably racked up between $75-100K in bills. We make good money, but that still would have killed us without insurance.
Post a Comment