Showing posts with label Health maintenance organization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health maintenance organization. Show all posts

Monday, March 22, 2010

American Health Reforms Slightly Better, But Long Way to Go

Healthcare American-style – you still have to pay for it out-of-pocket, but at least you can’t be turned down so quickly.

That’s the gist of the newest social reform for the United States of America in several decades, and it’s all part of American President Barack Obama’s call for universal healthcare across his country.

Here in Canada, we’ve had free, basic, universal healthcare since the founder of the New Democratic Party (NDP) Tommy Douglas in made it so in 1962 – Medicare began in his home province of Saskatchewan and was later adapted across Canada by Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson in 1965.

However, the word “free” never seems to apply to Americans and healthcare. Although American President Obama has done something many past presidents have publicly wanted too, it still is a long way from ensuring all Americans have healthcare.

Quite the contrary – in many instances this new healthcare reform may actually cause more harm, than good.

President Obama’s healthcare reform ensures that companies which provide health insurance – in the States they are commonly called Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) – can no longer turn down people because they or their family members have extensive health-related issues. It isn’t uncommon for HMO’s to turn down applicants for health insurance, due to past or present illnesses and diseases.

This is good news for someone who couldn’t get health insurance before, now they can, and they can finally have some or all of their medical costs covered.

However, this new law mandates that all Americans must have health insurance. So those who didn’t have health insurance simply because they couldn’t afford it, now must fork over the money to purchase it, else they can be fined between $700 to $1,000 USD.

This is a very different concept from the Canadian healthcare system. Upon becoming a Canadian citizen, automatically you qualify for government-run health insurance, which covers most basic costs, such as ambulatory care, check-ups and routine tests and procedures.

In fact, President Obama’s healthcare reforms don’t really guarantee universal healthcare – all they do is establish fines for HMOs if they fail to cover someone, and fines for American citizens for failing to buy healthcare insurance.

Real universal healthcare must be provided by the state – anything else just – pardon the pun – passes the buck.

Instead of ensuring Americans have universal healthcare, the new rules penalize the poor who can’t afford health insurance.

What President Obama should have put forward – although he had enough trouble getting his current reforms passed – was a truly universal Medicare system. One where it doesn’t matter what you have – or don’t have – in your wallet, you know if you break your leg, you’re covered.

The way it stands in the States now – if you break your leg and you don’t have either money or health insurance, you might as well just hop home – no doctor will even consider looking at you.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Health Reform American Style

Yesterday, American President Barak Obama spoke to Congress, trying to sway them towards his vision of universal and accessible healthcare.

There’s no question about it, American’s want a better healthcare system – but the debate how to improve the system is hotly contested on all fronts.

Many worry that given government’s long, slow, expensive miss-handling of many other programs, the federal government should be the last organization running the healthcare system. They claim taxes will go up, and the healthcare system won’t be any better off than it was prior to the reforms.

This particular viewpoint – held by some politicians and special interest g

Speaker Pelosi on Health Care Reform and Medic...Image by Speaker Pelosi via Flickr

roups – claim insurance companies should be given the ability to make changes, so that they can cover more people.

WAIT A SEC . . .

Insurance companies – HMOs? Isn’t the primary reason President Obama launched his universal medicare plans to clean up the mess caused by the big and all powerful insurance industry?

Insurance companies are in the business of staying in business, so they have been known to research and devise plans and programs which intentionally turn down medical claims – even if it means costing lives.

You don’t have to take my word on it – such cases have been documented on American investigative news shows including 60 Minutes and 20-20, just to name a few.

The truth of the matter, granting insurance companies greater powers won’t increase medical coverage to all, it will most likely limit it further, as the big insurers find even more ways to say “no” to the increased medical claims.

Governments may not always run perfectly – correction, they never run perfectly. No one is perfect, and ipso facto, nothing we human beings touch will ever be perfect.

But, governments, unlike big business, are not out to make a profit. If that were the case, the American War on Terror would probably have been sponsored by a slew of American companies.

Could you imagine the advertising?

This air strike is brought to by Johnson & Johnson, a family company.

WASHINGTON - MAY 11:  U.S. President Barack Ob...Image by Getty Images via Daylife


Kidding aside, governments do a fine job running healthcare in other countries.
Here in Canada, we’ve had universal, government-run healthcare for as long as I can remember. It isn’t perfect, but it works.

Other governments around the world manage the healthcare systems for their citizens, ensuring a better quality of life, as medical expenses don’t keep people from doing what is necessary to stay healthy.

Insurance companies are not evil entities, but they are the wrong choice to manage a healthcare system. That’s a direct conflict of interest – as the whole basis for insurance is the masses pay into it, while few actually need it.

In order for healthcare to be truly universal, the organization running it can’t have a vested interest in denying coverage to those who need it. That’s just going to create an even bigger mess in the American healthcare system.

Governments need not be perfect, but they do need to run a national healthcare system, if that healthcare system is to really be by the people, and for the people.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

ShareThis