Up to now, I have been going on the general defence of Americans and trying to dissolve some of the nasty myths and opinions that cross the Atlantic. But here is a case where, despite reading up on as much as possible and listening to Americans, I still have not had an answer to the following question. That is:
Why with a technologically advanced economy, society and revenue collection system America cannot get it together to ensure all the health needs of all the population are met. When I say health needs I am of course talking about the fact that I strongly feel if you live in a country as developed as the USA, one of the things you should not need to worry about when you are injured or severely sick is - how much is on my credit card, or this is going to bankrupt me? When you are sick you have enough on your plate. This is a human right for all. It should be defined in the UN Charter.
Unfortunately, enough Americans disagree with this and feel health insurance, is like car and life insurance and should remain on the general market. This means that although there are victims, American healthcare is the best in the world - if you can get to it. This is something I disagree with. But lets look back across the Atlantic at Britain and explore the good old NHS.
I read an article about the 2012 Olympics in London, an American article. They were sneering at us for a change. Laughing at why we celebrated NHS hospital beds on the opening ceremony. What other country celebrated a health service in an opening ceremony to define their culture. I admit it looked a bit daft. Probably Danny Boyle had been given a little too much free-reign in telling British culture through a working class perspective. Not that it isn't my preferable version of British modern history.
There was no better showcasing of the British view of the NHS. We are all united in defence of it, and any politician who suggests the slightest intervention by the private sector is an evil heartless Thatcherite. Because the NHS was built out of the most noblest of intentions. The father of the NHS, Nye Bevan said on it's formation "now we have the moral leadership of the world". A grand delusional soundbite, the welfare state was an invention of the German Empire pre WW1 (you know the evil Empire we fought against for no real reason), not ours at all. That said, while Britain was broke and battered from being first in and last out of WW2. Begging the USA for money to repair the towns blown to bits from The Blitz, it decided to reward the war heroes (which went beyond just those who held a gun) with health and housing. Not the way the government rewards modern soldiers today, with PR and poverty.
Greedy doctors, reluctant to join the socialized system, had their "mouths stuffed with money". The introduction of the NHS for all was not going to let anything get in its way. Not the broken UK balance sheet, not the greedy insurance companies, and not the doctors who feared becoming low-grade civil servants. And this is where Obama could have taken a look and some notes. Nye Bevan, took on the greedy and those who financially benefited from others being ill. Obama seemed only interested in taking on small businesses and individuals. The health system was right, ethically unavoidable so it needed to be done, end of discussion. America can find money for wars, they feel are morally right, but not healing the sick. Yes the more you dig back into the foundation of the NHS, and see it as our peaceful workers coup, I'm beginning to come on board and agree those dancers bouncing on the beds at the 2012 Olympics was a perfect and necessary inclusion into our culture, and the sneering American article can go fuck itself.
So why can't America get its shit together over Healthcare? I suppose there is the logic that the task is impossible. To make a comparison with American Health Insurers and pre-NHS British health insurers, is woefully inadequate. The American health insurance system has advanced into so many separate strands, employs many, and is tied to internal economics, you cannot just quickly pull this Jenga brick out suddenly. The British system was all over the place. The average workplace had each worker with a separate insurer. There was no mass-discount and grandfather schemes as in the US. Health insurance in the UK was a failing industry, and getting rid of it was a mercy killing.
Why do Americans accept their Healthcare so easily? OK there are those who have never left their state, and buy into the propaganda that American healthcare is the best in the world. The British let old people die on hospital beds (sometimes a little closer to the truth than we like to admit to the Yanks, even though it is not a policy).
Apart from the disciples of Sarah Palin, there are many Americans who say "it is what it is" and continue with their lives. Even though these same Americans would shout the roof down if the milk was too hot in their Latte. But realistically that's just it - it is what it is. It is rightly felt that an overhaul of the health system would carry such damage. Damage which may not right itself in a decade, its a gamble not worth taking. Especially as by definition no President, Congressman, Senator can commit himself to a plan longer than 4-6 years. That would be thinking of the people over electoral success, political madness.
Of course there are those who aren't in the least disciples of Palin, but reject the fact that healthcare should come from taxation. Or that healthcare should be controlled by the Federal government. These are often slightly left leaning Republicans, or Compassionate Conservatism to coin the Dubbya phrase from 14 years ago. And I have some sympathy for this line of thinking.
Yes the figures are there that in reality more American tax-dollars are spent in the end on the health industry than British do proportionately. But it is true when something is directly taxed, the government has a responsibility to it. Health and government are not good bed fellows. And, possibly you could take that criticism across the pond and say the modern drawback of the NHS (now we've stopped being all teary eyed about Bevin) is the government either overly tinkers or doesn't do enough, but either way is the big gremlin in the works.
Oh how the stupid debates continue; Should doctors run the NHS? 'No' the doctors say, we went to Medical School not Business School. Should businessmen run the NHS, get value for money and look at efficiency drives? 'No' the populous says, my young son with Leukaemia shouldn't have his life decided by an Excel formula.
In America, the government being out of the equation, has some merit. It is a fabulous idea, but completely impossible. Too many people are owing five and six figure debts on uninsured treatments. Debts they will forever be stained by, but never able to repay. The government cannot ever be so lessez faire, to ignore this. After all it is the ultimate underwriter.
Both British and Americans look across the pond and are horrified by eachothers health systems. And this is due to mutual misunderstanding of what is culturally important to the British, and a living reality to Americans. It's fuelled by documentaries in the UK such as one showing a clinic run by a British doctor, with massive lines forming at 5am for basic healthcare. And of course that twat Michael Moore and Sicko (Mr Socialism-Lite). The reality for most Americans in everyday life is not that drastic. If you are injured in a car accident - there is usually insurance for that. Americans work most of their lives and workplace liability covers many mishaps.
Most uninsured visits to US doctors carry a nasty but usually not financially damaging bill. Yes, if you need major surgery and you are uninsured, you could be utterly fucked. But behind this is often a culture of people clubbing together to raise money for someone needing help. Not completely dissimilar to the increasingly common fund raising drives in the UK to send cancer sufferers to the USA for treatment. The everyday American life is not that affected by their healthcare system, so really we Brits don't need to worry so much.
Alternatively, while I have personal knowledge of a child almost losing his hearing due to an NHS nurse saying that the popcorn he put in his ear will come out on its own, the reality of life in this socialist healthcare system is largely adequate. Old people aren't allowed to die by the NHS, they usually die because they are old. Thinking a socialized healthcare means a single standard across the nation, controlled by government, is an American misunderstanding. From my last local hospital who mis-diagnosed they popcorn child above, and my wife's ongoing complaint, and to sadly letting an old person die of near starvation (they forgot to feed her). A hospital in Bristol which mistakenly amputated the wrong leg. These make headlines, but are not an argument for or against private/socialized healthcare. Especially when you consider that a lady in an American hospital recently (a British lady as coincidence would have it) wandered off in a medicated haze and was found two weeks later, dead in a stairwell. No one in Britain is screaming that as an argument against private healthcare. Because aside from the headlines, I know of my sister who screams praise for tumour removed by the NHS and the after-care. And a former acquaintance of mine, who while suffering brain damage and from that being mentally unmanageable, was kept in a regular hospital by the most patient and firm nurses, while her parents were finding a specialized living arrangement for her.
No one likes to be sick. No one likes our loved ones to be sick. It's the most stressful time to sit as an observer or be a part of. When my wife was in hospital for four days while travelling, the helplessness, of just visiting her being the only thing I could do - it is horrible. At this time where the funding is coming from should not be an issue. Then again, this is an issue between family and doctor, it should not include the government. Where you are in hospital in the UK, will greatly affect your treatment, based on the medicines and beds available. But you have little choice to take control of all options, as you are likely to be constrained geographically. The American in a serious situation buys him/herself into a more involved part of the process. This is empowering for patient and the family, who have things to do to help. I get that, from my experience. My wife was in private care in Kuala Lumpur. At every stage we both felt involved, were given options. It is that touch which makes a huge difference.
Both the UK and the USA should not look at eachother, they are bad for eachother in this debate. They should both look at mainland Europe, Canada, Japan and Oceania. The systems which seem to know how to balance the private provision, with universal care regardless of wealth. Britain needs to realize, that while the Bevan and NHS formation story is a lovely one, it happened a long time ago and beautiful stories do not mean 21st century efficiency, medical education, employment, technology and finances.
Maybe in relation to both its own and America's healthcare, Britain should adopt that American phrase I have grown to adore, "is it what it is!". I should maybe adopt that phrase more myself.
Why with a technologically advanced economy, society and revenue collection system America cannot get it together to ensure all the health needs of all the population are met. When I say health needs I am of course talking about the fact that I strongly feel if you live in a country as developed as the USA, one of the things you should not need to worry about when you are injured or severely sick is - how much is on my credit card, or this is going to bankrupt me? When you are sick you have enough on your plate. This is a human right for all. It should be defined in the UN Charter.
Unfortunately, enough Americans disagree with this and feel health insurance, is like car and life insurance and should remain on the general market. This means that although there are victims, American healthcare is the best in the world - if you can get to it. This is something I disagree with. But lets look back across the Atlantic at Britain and explore the good old NHS.
I read an article about the 2012 Olympics in London, an American article. They were sneering at us for a change. Laughing at why we celebrated NHS hospital beds on the opening ceremony. What other country celebrated a health service in an opening ceremony to define their culture. I admit it looked a bit daft. Probably Danny Boyle had been given a little too much free-reign in telling British culture through a working class perspective. Not that it isn't my preferable version of British modern history.
There was no better showcasing of the British view of the NHS. We are all united in defence of it, and any politician who suggests the slightest intervention by the private sector is an evil heartless Thatcherite. Because the NHS was built out of the most noblest of intentions. The father of the NHS, Nye Bevan said on it's formation "now we have the moral leadership of the world". A grand delusional soundbite, the welfare state was an invention of the German Empire pre WW1 (you know the evil Empire we fought against for no real reason), not ours at all. That said, while Britain was broke and battered from being first in and last out of WW2. Begging the USA for money to repair the towns blown to bits from The Blitz, it decided to reward the war heroes (which went beyond just those who held a gun) with health and housing. Not the way the government rewards modern soldiers today, with PR and poverty.
Greedy doctors, reluctant to join the socialized system, had their "mouths stuffed with money". The introduction of the NHS for all was not going to let anything get in its way. Not the broken UK balance sheet, not the greedy insurance companies, and not the doctors who feared becoming low-grade civil servants. And this is where Obama could have taken a look and some notes. Nye Bevan, took on the greedy and those who financially benefited from others being ill. Obama seemed only interested in taking on small businesses and individuals. The health system was right, ethically unavoidable so it needed to be done, end of discussion. America can find money for wars, they feel are morally right, but not healing the sick. Yes the more you dig back into the foundation of the NHS, and see it as our peaceful workers coup, I'm beginning to come on board and agree those dancers bouncing on the beds at the 2012 Olympics was a perfect and necessary inclusion into our culture, and the sneering American article can go fuck itself.
So why can't America get its shit together over Healthcare? I suppose there is the logic that the task is impossible. To make a comparison with American Health Insurers and pre-NHS British health insurers, is woefully inadequate. The American health insurance system has advanced into so many separate strands, employs many, and is tied to internal economics, you cannot just quickly pull this Jenga brick out suddenly. The British system was all over the place. The average workplace had each worker with a separate insurer. There was no mass-discount and grandfather schemes as in the US. Health insurance in the UK was a failing industry, and getting rid of it was a mercy killing.
Why do Americans accept their Healthcare so easily? OK there are those who have never left their state, and buy into the propaganda that American healthcare is the best in the world. The British let old people die on hospital beds (sometimes a little closer to the truth than we like to admit to the Yanks, even though it is not a policy).
Apart from the disciples of Sarah Palin, there are many Americans who say "it is what it is" and continue with their lives. Even though these same Americans would shout the roof down if the milk was too hot in their Latte. But realistically that's just it - it is what it is. It is rightly felt that an overhaul of the health system would carry such damage. Damage which may not right itself in a decade, its a gamble not worth taking. Especially as by definition no President, Congressman, Senator can commit himself to a plan longer than 4-6 years. That would be thinking of the people over electoral success, political madness.
Of course there are those who aren't in the least disciples of Palin, but reject the fact that healthcare should come from taxation. Or that healthcare should be controlled by the Federal government. These are often slightly left leaning Republicans, or Compassionate Conservatism to coin the Dubbya phrase from 14 years ago. And I have some sympathy for this line of thinking.
Yes the figures are there that in reality more American tax-dollars are spent in the end on the health industry than British do proportionately. But it is true when something is directly taxed, the government has a responsibility to it. Health and government are not good bed fellows. And, possibly you could take that criticism across the pond and say the modern drawback of the NHS (now we've stopped being all teary eyed about Bevin) is the government either overly tinkers or doesn't do enough, but either way is the big gremlin in the works.
Oh how the stupid debates continue; Should doctors run the NHS? 'No' the doctors say, we went to Medical School not Business School. Should businessmen run the NHS, get value for money and look at efficiency drives? 'No' the populous says, my young son with Leukaemia shouldn't have his life decided by an Excel formula.
In America, the government being out of the equation, has some merit. It is a fabulous idea, but completely impossible. Too many people are owing five and six figure debts on uninsured treatments. Debts they will forever be stained by, but never able to repay. The government cannot ever be so lessez faire, to ignore this. After all it is the ultimate underwriter.
Both British and Americans look across the pond and are horrified by eachothers health systems. And this is due to mutual misunderstanding of what is culturally important to the British, and a living reality to Americans. It's fuelled by documentaries in the UK such as one showing a clinic run by a British doctor, with massive lines forming at 5am for basic healthcare. And of course that twat Michael Moore and Sicko (Mr Socialism-Lite). The reality for most Americans in everyday life is not that drastic. If you are injured in a car accident - there is usually insurance for that. Americans work most of their lives and workplace liability covers many mishaps.
Most uninsured visits to US doctors carry a nasty but usually not financially damaging bill. Yes, if you need major surgery and you are uninsured, you could be utterly fucked. But behind this is often a culture of people clubbing together to raise money for someone needing help. Not completely dissimilar to the increasingly common fund raising drives in the UK to send cancer sufferers to the USA for treatment. The everyday American life is not that affected by their healthcare system, so really we Brits don't need to worry so much.
Alternatively, while I have personal knowledge of a child almost losing his hearing due to an NHS nurse saying that the popcorn he put in his ear will come out on its own, the reality of life in this socialist healthcare system is largely adequate. Old people aren't allowed to die by the NHS, they usually die because they are old. Thinking a socialized healthcare means a single standard across the nation, controlled by government, is an American misunderstanding. From my last local hospital who mis-diagnosed they popcorn child above, and my wife's ongoing complaint, and to sadly letting an old person die of near starvation (they forgot to feed her). A hospital in Bristol which mistakenly amputated the wrong leg. These make headlines, but are not an argument for or against private/socialized healthcare. Especially when you consider that a lady in an American hospital recently (a British lady as coincidence would have it) wandered off in a medicated haze and was found two weeks later, dead in a stairwell. No one in Britain is screaming that as an argument against private healthcare. Because aside from the headlines, I know of my sister who screams praise for tumour removed by the NHS and the after-care. And a former acquaintance of mine, who while suffering brain damage and from that being mentally unmanageable, was kept in a regular hospital by the most patient and firm nurses, while her parents were finding a specialized living arrangement for her.
No one likes to be sick. No one likes our loved ones to be sick. It's the most stressful time to sit as an observer or be a part of. When my wife was in hospital for four days while travelling, the helplessness, of just visiting her being the only thing I could do - it is horrible. At this time where the funding is coming from should not be an issue. Then again, this is an issue between family and doctor, it should not include the government. Where you are in hospital in the UK, will greatly affect your treatment, based on the medicines and beds available. But you have little choice to take control of all options, as you are likely to be constrained geographically. The American in a serious situation buys him/herself into a more involved part of the process. This is empowering for patient and the family, who have things to do to help. I get that, from my experience. My wife was in private care in Kuala Lumpur. At every stage we both felt involved, were given options. It is that touch which makes a huge difference.
Both the UK and the USA should not look at eachother, they are bad for eachother in this debate. They should both look at mainland Europe, Canada, Japan and Oceania. The systems which seem to know how to balance the private provision, with universal care regardless of wealth. Britain needs to realize, that while the Bevan and NHS formation story is a lovely one, it happened a long time ago and beautiful stories do not mean 21st century efficiency, medical education, employment, technology and finances.
Maybe in relation to both its own and America's healthcare, Britain should adopt that American phrase I have grown to adore, "is it what it is!". I should maybe adopt that phrase more myself.
No comments:
Post a Comment