National Health Insurance: Is it the answer to our healthcare problem?

The United States healthcare system is often criticized as being one of the most costly and ineffective systems in the developed world. Compared to countries with socialized healthcare, such as Canada and the United Kingdom, America spends a much higher percentage of their GDP on healthcare, yet there are still millions of people within its boundaries that have no health insurance and thus suffer from lack of proper care. The graph on the left shows us that as of 1999, 16% of our population was uninsured, and that number has not decreased. Because of all the criticism that our healthcare system has been receiving, healthcare reform has become one of the hot topics of this year. A type of national health insurance has been proposed by some as a possible answer to this healthcare crisis. This week, in response to this issue, I decided to search the blogosphere for post regarding national health insurance that would enlighten me on its pros and cons. I was successful in finding one post opposing socialized medicine and another that gave a more positive view of this plan. The first post, Top 10 Trends in Healthcare, was found in the blog entitled The Holistic Economy by Daryl Kulak. The author gives his readers of list of ten ways towards which America's healthcare is shifting. He includes trends such as: the continuous rise in cost of medicine, the tendency for companies to opt-out of providing health insurance for their employees, and the increase of consumer-driven healthcare, among many others. More important to this post is his view on the shift of the perception of socialized medicine of the American public. He believes that a "government-run system" would not work in the United States because we value our independence and our freedom of choice too much. While he does acknowledge the need for reform, he does not pose a better option for change. The second post, Most Doctors Want a National Health Plan, by Jane Sarasohn-Kahn, was found in the Healthcare Blog. She is more optimistic in her view of the possibility of implementation of a more socialized healthcare system in our country and supports her thoughts with a recent study claiming that more physicians desire universal coverage now than in 2002. Below you will find links to the comments I left on these authors' pages, as well as the actual comments themselves. I urge you to read their post and look at the comments they have accrued in order to better inform yourself on the realities of national health insurance.

Comment 1 - I have to admit that I found the ten points you provided in this post to be pretty accurate. In particular, I was intrigued by your comments on American's distrust of socialized medicine. Although you do admit that our healthcare system is in need of reform, you failed to mention a different alternative to national health care. I would have liked to see you go more in depth with this trend because it is an extremely important topic right now. I feel that if America thought that the answer to our healthcare crisis was in a socialized healthcare system, our fear of losing our independence would not overcome our desire to better this country. I am not implying that America should shift towards a national health insurance, but you seem to completely dismiss it as an alternative. While your experiences might have not been excellent with the socialized Canadian healthcare system, I am sure that you acknowledge that both the Canadian systems as well as the United Kingdom's system have some parts to it that work well and from which we could learn. It might not require a single payer system to repair our healthcare problem, but we must do something in order to help all those millions of people in our country who find themselves without insurance. While alternative medicine can help these people in the short run, there is going to come a point in time when they are going to need specialized care, and then it will be more costly on the country then if we are proactive now in changing our healthcare system into one that will be sustainable for a long time.

Comment 2 - In the case of a national health insurance, I would imagine that there would be fewer physicians that would be against it rather than for it. I can see why there would be an increase in physician supported in the group of ER doctors because you are right in saying that they do see most of the uninsured patients, but I have a hard time believing that other doctors would want this to happen. The reason for my previous statement is that if we were to function under a single payer system, much of the competition would die down and physicians would be paid a much lower salary than what they are currently earning. While I am neither for nor against a national health plan, I do have some concerns with the quality of care that would be provided by such a system. It is often the case that we focus on the good qualities of socialized healthcare networks in other surrounding areas, but very little do we notice all their flaws. Also, if we take a look at the current government run healthcare system, otherwise known as the VA, it is not the best of systems. In fact, there are constant stories in the news that remind us of the low quality of care that VA patients receive. I would hope that, if our country did move towards a more socialized healthcare, the appropriate measures and precautions be taken. I do think that there are parts of our healthcare system that do work, and that trying to fix what we already have would not be a bad idea either. In terms of the chart that you provided (pictured on the upper right), I would like more information about how the study was conducted. Were the doctors who were polled randomized? What types of questions were they asked? It just seems to me that six out of ten doctors is a bit extreme in terms on national health insurance support. If you could please direct me where I could view the study, I would greatly appreciate it.