Legalize Health Care
Yes, that’s right–legalize health care. What’s that? It’s already legal, you say? Hmm…nope…just checked. I’m still not allowed to go out and buy any medication that the FDA hasn’t approved, since it’s illegal for a producer to sell me such items. Even then, I still can’t buy a great many FDA-approved medications that government says I need a prescription for. Oh, and that prescription has to come from a government-licensed doctor, and the medication has to be dispensed by a government-licensed pharmacist.
And if I need hospital care? Well, at least in my state (North Carolina) the government prohibits the very existence of any medical facility that doesn’t follow all the government rules, including (in most cases) treating patients that can’t pay and thus raising the fees for everyone else in order to cover it. And if I need an urgent MRI? Well, I might have a long wait because even private hospitals have to get permission from the government just to add a new MRI machine to their facilities! I swear I’m not making this up.
And then there’s insurance premiums, which continue to soar due to the fact that government rules have resulted in insurance morphing into prepaid medical plans that cover every little doctor visit and stubbed toe; not to mention the fact that insurance companies are mandated by government to cover certain things that some might choose not to cover when not coerced; and the fact that governments flat out tell insurance companies what they’re allowed to charge.
I’m sure I’m leaving out all kinds of coercive government actions that are responsible for the high cost of our health care, but you get the idea. It’s government coercion that is responsible for the mess we’re in. The state has engaged in aggression against would-be willing buyers and sellers and prevented their value for value trade from taking place. This is simple destruction of wealth and immoral initiation of force.
So the next time you hear Michael Moore or his minions going on about the desperate need for nationalized/socialized/universal health care, ask why they think more government is going to fix a government-caused problem.
P.S. I’m no health care expert, so if anyone sees anything I’ve left out or in some way misstated, do let me know.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Comments
Comment from Darren
Time: July 29, 2007, 7:42 pm
Great points, Michael. I agree that it’s probably more accurate to say ‘deregulate health care’ rather than ‘legalize health care,’ but I like the rhetorical impact of ‘legalize.’ Borrowed it from Ron Paul (i.e. ‘legalize competition’).
And thanks for reminding me about the Schiavo case. Government intrusion into end-of-life decisions is just as damaging as its intrusion into beginning-of-life decisions. I may have to do a post on that topic!
Thanks for your thoughts–always great to hear from someone who’s on the front lines.
Pingback from Government is Ruining Health Care
Time: January 16, 2008, 2:49 pm
[…] Couldn’t have said it better myself (although I made an attempt with Legalize Health Care). […]
Comment from Michael W. Russell, MD
Time: July 29, 2007, 3:13 pm
Well, I can tell I’m going to look forward to checking your blog on a regular basis. As for not being a “health care expert”, that only means you have no experience (read vested interest) in the health care industry. You seem to be a pretty savy consumer though. The “experts” (including yours truly) have something to gain or lose by the way business is done, so make sure you know what that might be when considering anyones’ point of view, including mine.
So, hopeful that I will see more discussion of many of the issues surrounding health care in the US on this site (and not just by Darren and myself), let me just take a small part of this particular topic. Perhaps more than “legalizing” health care perhaps a more fitting heading would be “deregulating” it. Lot’s of health care is legal, including the provision of care that cannot and will not affect in any way any known disease. Just as a single example, take chiropractic care. The absence of any physiologic foundation or scientific validity for anything associated with chiropractic practice is so widely known that reciting it here would be pointless. And I am inclined to agree with H.L. Menken who said “if a mother choses to have her babe cured of diptheria by having it’s neck yanked by an ex-stevadore, I, for one, am loath to resist the divine will that there be one less radio fan in 1963″ … or some such pithy equivalent. In other words, if chiropractic manipulation makes you feel better, by all means have at it. The problem, of course, is that chiropractic coverage is mandated by most if not all state legislatures despite the fact that it is a completely useless therapy. Let me say that again …. it is mandatory that insurers cover chiropractic care in order to be allowed to write any form of health insurance, even if many of us would happily forgo the option of having chiropractic manipulations to reduce our non-existant subluxations.
“And then there’s insurance premiums, which continue to soar due to the fact that government rules have resulted in insurance morphing into prepaid medical plans that cover every little doctor visit and stubbed toe; not to mention the fact that insurance companies are mandated by government to cover certain things that some might choose not to cover when not coerced”
This is a very, VERY important point. Insurance is a device for protecting against unanticipated and excessive loss. It is not, or at least wasn’t orginally, a “prepaid” plan that covers every conceviable expenditure related to “health”. My auto insurance doesn’t buy my gas, pay for my oil changes, or air up my tires. I can pick a small or large deductable. I can even purchase “liability only” coverage assuming I own the vehicle outright. In otherwords, there are a range of insurance choices open to me given my own perception of my needs and interests. Not so in the case of health “insurance”. But maybe one day Jiffy-Lube will catch on (like the chiropractic brotherhood did) and demand that a state legislature require it’s insurance commision to mandate coverage of oil changes.
Let’s start at the beginning. “Health” is defined by Websters as “optimal mental and physical soundness and well being”. That covers a lot of ground. Regular yoga classes are required by some for “optimal mental well being”. I, myself, find regular formal meditation helpful from the standpoint of my mental well being. I don’t expect someone else to pay for it.
Webster further defines “health care” as “the prevention and treatment of illness through the delivery of medical services”. That is something …prevention and treatment of illness… that chiropractic, yoga, aroma therapy, crystals, magnets, chelation, and any number of other things that makes some folks “feel better” cannot possibly do according to any reasonable interpretation of scientific evidence. So providing for “health care” insurance should not include things of no proven value. That would, incidently, also include many things that my traditionally trained colleagues would also happily foist upon you with equally thin evidence of efficacy, so I will throw stones from within my own glass house just to be fair. And the ‘health care insurance” I would happily purchase would relieve me of exorbitant premiums by letting me pay out-of-pocket for relatively inexpensive preventative and routine visits (oil changes) in favor of covering the bigger ticket items (transmission replacement as a result of age or accident)… you get the idea.
For that to happen a few things would have to change. Insurance vendors would have to be given the freedom to construct a variety of products instead of being coerced into covering nonsense. Providers (like me) would have to be willing to compete based on(which means be willing to discuss) price, something we Doctors’ don’t like to dirty our hands with. We are allowed a profesional detachment from such mundane issues as money so we can go around saying stupid things like “cost is no object” in maintaning “health”. That’s why we like you to have someone else pay us for services we provide to you. We can argue with them while seeming to take the high road as your “advocate” under no financial contraint … at least not as far as you’re concerned.
Cost is always an object. I don’t know about you, but my “optimum mental and physical soundness and well being” includes issues of the cost of goods and services of all types … essential, discretionary, and frivolous …. compared to the benefit to be derived from the aquisition of those goods and services. My Mother is now in a “skilled nursing facility”, a medical euphamism for a nursing home. Her income is not meeting the expenses of her care. Her husband of 50 years died recently and she is in constant, moderately severe pain from a musculoskeletal condition. With aggressive care for every change in her condition, we could probably extend her life another 5 to 10 years. In the process, we would exhaust her assets in the continuance of an existance she no longer sees as having “value”. Her “optimum mental and physical soundness and well being” is adversely affected by anything that does not relieve her pain directly and that would only prolong her suffering and bankrupt her estate. Fortunately for her, it is still legal to refuse care that is not wanted by the patient. If the federal forces weighing in on the Shiavo case had had their way, that might not be the case.
Be careful what you wish for and please pay attention. 2008 WILL MATTER.