Better Health: Smart Health Commentary Better Health (TM): smart health commentary

Article Comments (2)

The Illusion Of Healthcare Reform

The greatest minds are assembled to discern the answer in healthcare reform. Powerful interest groups are aligned to design solutions to protect their turf. Rubrics, formulas, slogans and taglines get designed, spun, pitched and thrown out. The burden of finding alignment, an answer, a plan that suits everyone seems insurmountable — unless we don’t.

The idea of a fit for all is an illusion. Justice and equity are seen differently. We imagine some public consensus at our own peril. But honesty has been in short supply. To paraphrase Oprah: What do we know for sure?

Some people want a relationship with a trusted doctor who knows them well. They want to pick the doctor, the neighborhood and the hospital they attend. Others want immediate access and have little trust or interest in a personal relationship with a doctor.

Some people want interchangeable access to medical care in the most convenient venue — they care little if it occurs at Walgreens, doc-in-a-box, by a nurse practitioner or by a newly-minted resident — it is about access that fits their lifestyle, which may be at a late hour and may be chosen by shortest waiting time at an ER. To others, this type of medical care is anathema.

Some people do not trust the medical field — they want oversight, monitoring, zero errors, and do not want to rely of a doctor’s judgment. They prefer rubrics, computer generated solutions and objective control. Others live in fear of losing the right to confer with their doctor as to his best judgment,, with freedom to choose treatment, medication and plans made between doctor and patient.

Some people expect to pay nothing for their healthcare — they want healthcare provided as a right, an entitlement, a government administered program that can never disappear. They do not want to have health savings accounts, worry about saving for care, or plan for medical expenses. Others are prepared to pay for the type of healthcare they want and when they want it. These people would rather have choice and control over the security of someone else being in charge.

Some people see healthcare as a chance to exercise equity and redistribution — the chance to level the playing field in healthcare delivery trumps the issues of rationing, waits, doctor availability or any other front line problem. Others do not support redistribution or using healthcare as a method of forcing equity in a country that has thus far been thought of as a meritocracy.

We will not find agreement. If there is one thing we can agree on, it is that. What to do then?

Most obviously, a forced solution shoved onto an unwilling public is wrong. A government that takes a position to advocate for either side of the preferences and needs listed above is on dangerous territory. Can both types of healthcare exist? What would that look like? Or do we kill one in the race to get to the other?

Much of our current conundrum is a failure of courage. We know what we secretly believe but we are unwilling to say it. If we publicly endorse healthcare for all as a right, while privately planning on paying for our own special needs at a future date — we hamper any honest resolution. We need to be honest about what kind of a society we live in and how we see healthcare fitting in. Guilt, shaming, intimidation and fear are poor policy planners. How do we explicitly acknowledge the differing needs and plan for them without denial of either group?

We will not solve the issue of trust. We will not solve the issue of lifestyle, cost, access, convenience, or fear of fairness. We will not make all patients compliant, responsible for their own treatment, or responsible for their own expenses. We will not change human nature so that all follow medical plans religiously, or stop chaotic lifestyles or master self-destructive behavior. So we must acknowledge this directly as we design solutions — multiple solutions.

Our society is unique in honoring individualism, freedom and plurality. Can our solutions for healthcare tomorrow reflect this? We are not there yet.

– Diane Fisher, Ph.D.

*This blog post was originally published at Dr. Wes*

You may also like these posts

    None Found

Read comments »

2 Responses to “The Illusion Of Healthcare Reform”

  1. Greg Judd says:

    Dear Dr Fisher: please explain what’s being forced on whom, in such a binary fashion as you imply above? HCR as legislated has been lumpy, bumpy, and plenty ugly – and the post-passage touch-up work has been of a piece – but we aren’t talking law made by Darth Vader-out-of-Mussolini here, despite your dire outlook. Why not a call to action, rather than a call to friction?

  2. Med Ed says:

    Slowly, we are seeing the destruction of the bill. I guess that’s better than the destruction of the health care system.

    Let’s just start over and focus on cost-containment. Tweak the system. Don’t destroy it.

Return to article »

Latest Interviews

IDEA Labs: Medical Students Take The Lead In Healthcare Innovation

It’s no secret that doctors are disappointed with the way that the U.S. healthcare system is evolving. Most feel helpless about improving their work conditions or solving technical problems in patient care. Fortunately one young medical student was undeterred by the mountain of disappointment carried by his senior clinician mentors…

Read more »

How To Be A Successful Patient: Young Doctors Offer Some Advice

I am proud to be a part of the American Resident Project an initiative that promotes the writing of medical students residents and new physicians as they explore ideas for transforming American health care delivery. I recently had the opportunity to interview three of the writing fellows about how to…

Read more »

See all interviews »

Latest Cartoon

See all cartoons »

Latest Book Reviews

Book Review: Is Empathy Learned By Faking It Till It’s Real?

I m often asked to do book reviews on my blog and I rarely agree to them. This is because it takes me a long time to read a book and then if I don t enjoy it I figure the author would rather me remain silent than publish my…

Read more »

The Spirit Of The Place: Samuel Shem’s New Book May Depress You

When I was in medical school I read Samuel Shem s House Of God as a right of passage. At the time I found it to be a cynical yet eerily accurate portrayal of the underbelly of academic medicine. I gained comfort from its gallows humor and it made me…

Read more »

Eat To Save Your Life: Another Half-True Diet Book

I am hesitant to review diet books because they are so often a tangled mess of fact and fiction. Teasing out their truth from falsehood is about as exhausting as delousing a long-haired elementary school student. However after being approached by the authors’ PR agency with the promise of a…

Read more »

See all book reviews »