Some thoughts – and a call for comments – on health-care policy from Dr. Marc Siegel, FOX News’s Medical Contributor and a practicing physician.
The more I hear from politicians, academics, and insurance company representatives about the need to reform health care, the more I wonder what actual patients and their doctors think.
Actually, I don't wonder, I think I know.
I take care of patients on a day-to-day basis and I interact with practicing doctors rather than bureaucrats. And I can tell you, there are a lot of disgruntled folks out there who don't believe that President Obama has the miracle cure to our health-care problems.
Doctors are already fed up with insurances, public and private, and are leaving it by droves. Patients are already sick of long waiting lines in doctors’ offices, and of defensive interventional care administered by rushed paper-pushers who are afraid of lawsuits.
Primary-care doctors don't believe that national health insurance will give them more time to see their patients with less paperwork and higher reimbursements or more control -- in fact, they believe just the opposite, which is why only 2% of medical-school graduates choose primary care as a profession. Surgeons are already complaining that after long years of training to a high skill level, their reimbursements for long operations are being cut.
So why don't we doctors organize and fight the changes, when all they will do is flood us with more patients we don't have the time or resources to take care of properly?
One answer is that few of us believe that the American Medical Association can properly represent our concerns. A second answer is that we are too busy to band together. A third reason is that too many of us are afraid to stand up, for fear of being signaled out.
But that's just my opinion.
What is your opinion?
Doctors out there, patients out there, speak up and tell us what your worries are about the sweeping changes in health insurance that President Obama is trying to make a reality.
Write back to us here with your opinions and insights. There is still time for doctors to fight back before we are swept under the bus.
I love Chris' ideas but believe that there will be an irresponsible subset of individuals that won't buy the insurance and will expect to be treated anyway. I believe Pat's comments as well. Having relatives living in Europe and friends in Canada, I hear that is one way govenrment controls costs-don't treat the illness.
So how do responsible individuals protect ourselves from irresponsible individuals? Maybe everyone needs to have proof of insurance and if they don't willingly buy it on their own, they are forced to buy a Medicare type insurance from the government.
Dennis Miller said it very well the other night on Cavuto. I don't mind helping the "helpless", I don't want to be helping the "clueless." I don't think Obama knows (or maybe cares) about the difference between helpless and clueless.I also believe he is so blinded by his preoccupation with "fairness", that will limit his ability to be rational.
Things to note;
1. Any nationalized, universal coverage model rations care (try getting an MRI in less than 18 months in Canada).
2. The only way the politician can balance the budget is to reduce the reimbursement rates (see medicare for the last 15 years), which results in fewer providers wanting to accept the program, or be doctors (see rationing above).
3. It is the socialistic aspects of healthcare (no price or quality data published to the consumer) that are ruining it right now.
I am neither a doctor nor a frequent patient (fortunately) but am an insurance agent in the State of Maine. We are burdened by a state legislature primarily peopled by democrats who were responsible, along with our democrat governor, for the failed DIRIGO health insurance experiment. What was billed as a universal health care program that expected over 100,000 policyholders, has ended up with just over 13,000 due to higher than touted premiums. The legislature has refused to recognize the very expensive "commumity rating" and "guaranteed issue" rating methods in an attempt to further the goal of a successful universal health care system. As long as this state continues to cast a blind eye to these two "rate enhancers", our health insurance premiums will be some of the highest in the nation.
I don't know if this scenario sounds familiar to any of you but until individuals are allowed to purchase health insurance policies across state lines thus enabling a "cafeteria" approach, commercial health insurance will continue to be expensive. A "cafeteria" approach would let individuals purchase only the coverages they deem necessary and not be saddled with expensive endorsements that their own health history does not dictate.
The commercial insurance answer will allow individuals to pick their doctors and allow doctors to determine proper treatment rather than a government "gatekeeper" (bureaucrat). Doctors paperwork/harassment will be reduced as well.
I believe if the feds get their grubby hands on health care, that people my age(64) will become expendable. I would prefer to see health care plans organized by local medical communities with the goal of providing coverage to its members( people lke me ) for a fee to cover routine medical and dental needs. Major procedures could be offerred by larger specialty groups covering a larger geographical area. The groups ideally would not be constrained by state lines. Anything the government touches eventually deteriorates to something unmanageable and unaffordable.
I believe that the focus needs to get back to the patient. The doctors should be paid a salary commensurate with their experience. The medical industry must become more high tech for efficiency and cost. If the costs can be brought into line and the insurance companies more competative, most people could afford it.
"Health Care" needs to return to "Hospitalization Insurance". It's absurd that if you visit your doctor for the flu, acid reflux or a routine physical that a mountain of paperwork has to be filed for them to receive payment. My idea is this: A three tiered plan. Any visit to the doctor should be paid on the spot, no paperwork and a single list of prices for serves rendered. 2nd tier would be a $500.00 deductible for high end tests such as MRI's, heart scans, colonscopies, etc. 3rd tier would be a $5000.00 for a visit to the ER or if you're hospitalized. ALL insurance should be OWNED by the individual. For companies to pay their employees a "health care" benefit, it would be a non-taxed payment that would go into an HSA, where the individual could pay their insurance premiums and out of pocket expenses. The responsibility HAS TO GO BACK TO THE PATIENT.
Subscribe to Comments
AC
I love Chris' ideas but believe that there will be an irresponsible subset of individuals that won't buy the insurance and will expect to be treated anyway. I believe Pat's comments as well. Having relatives living in Europe and friends in Canada, I hear that is one way govenrment controls costs-don't treat the illness. So how do responsible individuals protect ourselves from irresponsible individuals? Maybe everyone needs to have proof of insurance and if they don't willingly buy it on their own, they are forced to buy a Medicare type insurance from the government. Dennis Miller said it very well the other night on Cavuto. I don't mind helping the "helpless", I don't want to be helping the "clueless." I don't think Obama knows (or maybe cares) about the difference between helpless and clueless.I also believe he is so blinded by his preoccupation with "fairness", that will limit his ability to be rational.
Jim Snedden
Healthcare will not be fixed until there is meaningful tort reform. Far too many tests, etc. are given simply to cover ones behind from a lawsuit.
Chris
Things to note; 1. Any nationalized, universal coverage model rations care (try getting an MRI in less than 18 months in Canada). 2. The only way the politician can balance the budget is to reduce the reimbursement rates (see medicare for the last 15 years), which results in fewer providers wanting to accept the program, or be doctors (see rationing above). 3. It is the socialistic aspects of healthcare (no price or quality data published to the consumer) that are ruining it right now.
Rick
I am neither a doctor nor a frequent patient (fortunately) but am an insurance agent in the State of Maine. We are burdened by a state legislature primarily peopled by democrats who were responsible, along with our democrat governor, for the failed DIRIGO health insurance experiment. What was billed as a universal health care program that expected over 100,000 policyholders, has ended up with just over 13,000 due to higher than touted premiums. The legislature has refused to recognize the very expensive "commumity rating" and "guaranteed issue" rating methods in an attempt to further the goal of a successful universal health care system. As long as this state continues to cast a blind eye to these two "rate enhancers", our health insurance premiums will be some of the highest in the nation. I don't know if this scenario sounds familiar to any of you but until individuals are allowed to purchase health insurance policies across state lines thus enabling a "cafeteria" approach, commercial health insurance will continue to be expensive. A "cafeteria" approach would let individuals purchase only the coverages they deem necessary and not be saddled with expensive endorsements that their own health history does not dictate. The commercial insurance answer will allow individuals to pick their doctors and allow doctors to determine proper treatment rather than a government "gatekeeper" (bureaucrat). Doctors paperwork/harassment will be reduced as well.
Pat Cipriani
I believe if the feds get their grubby hands on health care, that people my age(64) will become expendable. I would prefer to see health care plans organized by local medical communities with the goal of providing coverage to its members( people lke me ) for a fee to cover routine medical and dental needs. Major procedures could be offerred by larger specialty groups covering a larger geographical area. The groups ideally would not be constrained by state lines. Anything the government touches eventually deteriorates to something unmanageable and unaffordable.
Mike
I believe that the focus needs to get back to the patient. The doctors should be paid a salary commensurate with their experience. The medical industry must become more high tech for efficiency and cost. If the costs can be brought into line and the insurance companies more competative, most people could afford it.
Chris Brooks
"Health Care" needs to return to "Hospitalization Insurance". It's absurd that if you visit your doctor for the flu, acid reflux or a routine physical that a mountain of paperwork has to be filed for them to receive payment. My idea is this: A three tiered plan. Any visit to the doctor should be paid on the spot, no paperwork and a single list of prices for serves rendered. 2nd tier would be a $500.00 deductible for high end tests such as MRI's, heart scans, colonscopies, etc. 3rd tier would be a $5000.00 for a visit to the ER or if you're hospitalized. ALL insurance should be OWNED by the individual. For companies to pay their employees a "health care" benefit, it would be a non-taxed payment that would go into an HSA, where the individual could pay their insurance premiums and out of pocket expenses. The responsibility HAS TO GO BACK TO THE PATIENT.