Home  |  Out & About  |  Dining  |  Events  |  Singles  |  Classifieds  |  Archive  |  Advertising


 

Review Magazine - Politics

Patients Bill of Rights Fails to Address Underlying Issues of U.S. Health Care Crisis

By Robert E Martin

 

 
The recent passage by the Senate of the Patients Bill of Rights and the

pending debate in the House of Representatives once again highlights the

major problems with the current costly and failing corporate profit driven

plan that the majority of Americans have been brainwashed into believing is

the 'best' system by insurance companies.
While Senators McCain, Edwards and Kennedy should be applauded for the

tremendous job they have done in crafting a bipartisan bill that will

provide strong patient protections and curb insurance company abuses, it is

just the first of many steps that should be taken to ensure all Americans

receive quality health care.
Perhaps the biggest problem with the current Patients Bill of Rights is

that it does nothing to address the issue of the uninsured. Indeed, it is a

national disgrace that 42 million Americans do not have health insurance.

Who are the uninsured?
They are 17.5 percent of our non-elderly population.  A shameful 25 percent

are children.  The majority - 83 percent - are in working families.

The consequences of our nation's significant uninsured population are

devastating.  The uninsured are significantly more likely to delay or

forego needed care.  The uninsured are less likely to receive preventive

care.   Delaying or not receiving treatment can lead to more serious

illness and avoidable health problems. This in turn results in unnecessary

and costly hospitalizations.
In 1999, for the first time in a decade we saw a slight decrease in the

uninsured. But we still have so far to go.   Health care should be a

fundamental right, and neither the government nor the private sector is

doing enough to secure that right for everyone.
The Senate recently passed and the House is currently debating a patients'

rights bill that supporters hope will compensate for some of the worst

abuses of the managed health care system.
The current system evolved after the failure of privatized national health

care legislation proposed by former President Clinton during his first

term. Dozens of insurance companies now provide a patchwork of restrictive

coverage plans while more than 40 million Americans have no coverage at

all.
The U.S. health care system is by far the most expensive and flawed in the

industrialized world. Despite national pride in the high quality of

American medical care, the Institute of Medicine recently found that nearly

100,000 patients die in hospitals annually due to physician error.
And perhaps the greatest outrage is the threat of President Bush to veto

the Patients Bill of Rights because it purportedly benefits "trial

attorneys".   Indeed, it illustrates how Bush is antithetical to the very

constitutional system our nation was founded upon.  For if negligence is an

issue with these 100,000 deaths, then it is up to a jury to decide, based

upon the evidence, what the damages should be.  And by placing 'caps' on a

person's life and livelihood, it merely demonstrates Bush's allegiance to

the profit driven insurance industry that regards human life as statistical

flowcharts.
In calling for reform, consumer groups, some health care providers, and a

small band in Congress, have proposed single-payer, universal health

coverage as an antidote to the current corporate, profit-driven model.
One of the groups which have long advocated a universal system is

Physicians for a National Health Program or PNHP.
Recently journalist Melinda Tuhus spoke with PNHP's coordinator, Dr.

Quentin Young, who has practiced medicine in Chicago for five decades and

has been in the forefront of the struggle for health care reform. He talks

about the movement for universal care and the prospects for change to

substantively address America's health care crisis.
"Physicians for a National Health Program was founded in 1988, when 100

physicians from across the country signed a declaration calling in brief,

for a national health insurance plan, single-payer plan, best understood as

Medicare for everybody, but without the encumbrances that Medicare is

burdened with such as no co-pays, no deductibles, no caps, no first-day

hospital charges, comprehensive pharmacy coverage, parity for mental health

and long-term care," explains Dr. Young.
"Basically, a modern, social justice kind of health care system. I would

say our greatest achievement in little over a decade is the high quality

scientific studies that make the case for single-payer national health

insurance and make the case against the for-profit, corporate take-over of

our health system, which tragically coincided with that same dozen years,"

he continues.
Tuhus: When you say, "studies make the case," are you referring to how your

studies have shown that it would actually save money to have this kind of

universal system?
Dr. Quentin Young: Well, we make the case in every way -- first and

foremost economically, since the cost of the health system is on the top of

most people's agendas -- the politicians, the business community and

indeed, the public as patients.
So that's a very ready-made case, not only with the data in our own

country, but from the experiences of the 18 industrial, democratic

countries of the world, each of whom, over the years, has chosen to take

national responsibility for health care of their people.
They all do it in a comprehensive way, covering everybody for typically

half or even less than half of what we spend per capita for our faulty

system. But beyond the fiscal (issues), we make the case for better quality

and a reversal of the trends toward danger and un-safety that is being

carefully chronicled most recently by the Institute of Medicine.
The Institute found nearly a 100,000 people perish in hospitals from

errors, and make the case for preventive medicine, for preserving

patient-doctor relationships and access to specialty care, emergency room

care and so on -- data unequivocally compelling to show that the public is

being ripped off.
Tuhus:  What stands in the way of that, since the system is so far from

perfect now?
Dr. Quentin Young: Well, we spend a lot of time both facing opposition and

trying to understand them. It turns out at the top of the list are

ideologies -- false ideology.
That is to say, the American people have been brainwashed against

government programs and taxes, both of which are components of the proposal

we make.

It's ironic, the standard joke we make which is bitter humor -- namely, the

little old lady who passionately begged her doctor, "Don't let the

government get their hands on my Medicare!" unaware that Medicare is a

government program, a big government program, a very successful program,

and yet, it's under attack by reactionary forces who want to privatize it,

who want to force people into HMOs which have already proven their

dysfunction and counterproductivity.

This Patient's Bill of Rights is an attempt to address that. As far as

we're concerned, it's desirable to give people protection, but any illusion

that that would solve the problems of our health care system is just that

-- a sad illusion.
Tuhus:  Do you see any hope for your noble cause, with the physicians who

are part of your organization, getting us from where we are to anything

resembling a more just system that you are talking about?
Dr. Quentin Young: I really do. My optimism relies on two or three things.

One, first and foremost, the system we have, as costly as it is, is

failing. I mean, literally failing.
Since we started talking, several hundred more Americans have had bad

experiences with the system. Most of us - to continue the answer to your

question of prospects -- have come to believe that it will be one, two or

three states that enact (a universal health care system), and have some

experience with it, before it becomes national policy. It turns out, that

mechanism, that sequence is very typical for major reforms like women's

suffrage -- it was enacted in a number of states before it became federally

constituted.
Workman's compensation, unemployment insurance and even Social Security

were first tried in the states. So I think it's quite likely that will be

the sequence here. What I'm saying is that it's happening in that direction

faster than we optimists expected.

Contact Physicians for a National Health Program by calling (312) 782-6006 
or visit their Web site at http://www.pnhp.org.


 

Enable frames
 

home  |  out/about  |  events  |   personal  |  store  |  classified  |  real estate  |   forums  |  archives  |  contact
© 2009 Review Magazine.  All rights reserved.

Enable frames