Search

12 reasons why Healthcare Coverage for all does not mean Healthcare for all or “Universal Healthcare

Originally Published on Medium

Photo by Olya Kobruseva from Pexels

It’s a grave mistake if you think providing healthcare coverage equates to providing quality healthcare for all. Sure, everyone gets under coverage; but does it ensure that patients get the treatment they deserve?

We have drugs being advertised on the TV which can’t be prescribed by doctors because they are too costly or not covered by the patient insurance; the same goes for treatment and medical procedures.

Doctors are being encouraged with performance-based pays, but they lack the necessary resources to deliver quality service. The USA spent $3.3 trillion on healthcare in 2016, but did it make any difference?

A government study developed by the National Research Council found that Americans die at much younger ages than most other high-income countries. What are we spending so much money on!

We have so many political interventions regarding healthcare to make it universal- the Obamacare and the American Health Care Act are sadly not the right directions we are going!

So what do we need to make a universal healthcare system that benefits both doctors and patients?

Universal healthcare means all aspects will be universal. But that is far removed from the truth! Let us explore why healthcare coverage for all doesn’t equate to healthcare for all.

1. Not Universally Affordable

The average hospital stay in the U.S costs three times higher than 33 other OECD countries standing at $18,000. Not every patient can pay it out of their pockets, and even the insurance policies don’t cover such expenses all the time.

We need an open and competitive market that results in affordable healthcare for all.

2. Restricted Availability

In 2014 only 7.3% of Americans had access to health insurance

The situation hasn’t improved much, even though we have moved towards mandatory insurance. To be universal, healthcare must be available across all geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic spectrums, making it universally accessible.

3. Limited Distribution

Though the USA spends $8,508 per person, the quality is care is not evenly distributed across all areas and communities. It has to follow the defined standard of care and use its practical healthcare delivery resource to offer the same quality of care in metropolitan areas in regions such as the Indian reservation.

4. Lacks Universal Standard

We have to develop a universal standard of healthcare based on technological, medical science, and strategic advances. It should not be based on financial or socioeconomic conditions- it has to be developed based on medical advancement and success rate.

5. Not Universally Accessible

Let us not confuse availability with accessibility- you can have a world-class hospital, but patients may not be able to access it due to unnecessary processes and other restrictions.

We have to bring healthcare in the reach of each patient to reach out and get help without any delay.

6. Lacks Universal Transferability

Mandatory healthcare and coverage limit the flexibility available to patients. It becomes challenging to shift from one care model to another even when the benefits are stark. Patients and doctors should be able to choose freely based on their situation, needs, and will.

7. No Freedom to Select

The power of consumers enables them to compare, test and select a solution. The same should be applied to healthcare, and we should not be restricted to choices made by the state or other regulatory institutions.

8. The Need for Independent Healthcare System

For the healthcare system to be universal,l must be free to make its decisions. It should not be interrupted and manipulated by monopoly and corporate greed. We should also strive to keep it free from political influence and third-party profit motives, only focusing on patient and doctor interests.

9. Short of Universal Transparency

The healthcare system should be transparent with the ability to track down responsible parties. Only a transparent system can foster healthcare for all and bring an end to the need for whistleblowing, like in the case of Lexington Medical Center who indulged in fraud.

We can achieve this transparency by entitling healthcare data only to the authorized parties.

10. Not Universally Deliverable

All industries have been able to move towards effective delivery of goods and services in the age of smartphones and the internet. But it does not apply to healthcare which is still far behind in delivering services effectively, whether remote or onsite.

11. The Need for Universal Personalization

The need for patient-centric care and personalization in healthcare has changed how the system works. Patients are aware of their needs and want in this information age, and the population-based healthcare strategy is not valid anymore.

We have to rise above the perception of the ‘majority and tune the healthcare service according to personal patient needs, which is impossible with a single-payer healthcare coverage “only” solution.

12. Away from Universal Authentication

Patients and doctors should be able to control and manage their data. They can share the information as they please for effective authentication. That should be the case with every stakeholder in the system.

We can only achieve universal healthcare with an open mind in a free and open market where market forces determine prices. The state cannot dictate healthy people to pay for sick people by mandating coverage and taxes.

Health is an individual right and we need to be able to choose freely as a universal system implies.



2 views0 comments