Warning: Side-Effects of Government Health Care Coverage Include A Definite Loss in Freedom

J+M+J

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

~Benjamin Franklin

In a nation founded upon the belief that safeguarding personal liberty is more vital to humanity than simply maintaining one's physical well-being, it is travesty indeed when many Americans are clamoring for “universal health care” at the cost of relinquishing yet more freedom to an ever-growing federal government. The reverence once bestowed on liberty, a reverence felt so deeply in the American consciousness that the blood of patriots saturates our soil, seems all but a memory, as so many Americans, in an effort to “ensure” – seemingly – health care coverage for all, dismiss the catastrophic consequences such actions would bring to our cherished, however imperfect, way of American life. Instead of championing the virtue of self-responsibility and accepting the trials which freedom naturally entails, modern Americans, generally speaking, seem all-to-willing to hand over the fruits of liberty for the “promise” of material safety – a “promise” made by historically untrustworthy politicians, at that. Our ancestors, the custodians of our sacred liberty, would, undoubtedly, shake their heads in utter regret at the compromises we have made at freedom's expense.

It would be sheer naivety to refer to our current situation as anything other than bleak. Yet, our forefathers were confronted with seemingly insurmountable odds, too, in their quest to protect those God-given rights, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” (notice that list does not include the right to a health care plan) for themselves and their descendants. So, rather than sinking into the abyss of social/political despair, it is essential for conscientious citizens, committed to revitalizing our nation – not revamping it in a mess of radical change – and defending the Constitution, to reject Washington's proposed health care reform – no matter the perceived benefits – and, once again, uphold the virtue of individual responsibility.

Today, the natural question arising in the minds of many Americans, especially when it appears the government is handing them health care coverage (nevermind the quality) on a silver platter, is: what recourses do we have, what avenues can we pursue to remedy the undeniable problems of our current health care system, without bowing down to the political self-proclaimed demi-gods in Washington? It seems clear that by practicing self-discipline and restraint, many of America's health care ailments could be greatly relieved, if not all-together cured, without the intrusive hand of government mandating our every move.

Health Insurance and the Doctor-Patient Relationship

One of the chief ways of improving our health care system would be to largely eliminate the health insurance companies’ involvement in the doctor-patient relationship. The obvious was once made clear to me when someone pointed out that all other insurance policies (i.e. auto, home, life, etc.) don't cover any and all problems that may arise for the insured. No one balks that car insurance does not cover the costs of refueling one's car or providing routine maintenance for said vehicle. Everyone seems to understand that auto, home, or life insurance only covers you in the event of an accident or catastrophe. Yet, for some reason, people simply expect that every wellness check-up their child receives, every visit to the dentist, should be covered, if not in its entirety, at least in part by insurance providers. Subsequently, since a third party is often footing a patient's bill, hospitals, physicians, pharmaceutical companies, etc. can, with little reserve, charge astronomical fees for their services, resting assured in the knowledge that the “limitless” pockets of insurance agencies won't fail to compensate them. Had the exchange of goods and services remained between physician and patient, the price of medicine would undoubtedly have remained in check, having been reined in by the consumer's means. Furthermore, by largely removing the responsibility of payment from the patient, the presence of insurance companies has provided little incentive for citizens to be mindful of the health care dollars they spend as individuals or as families. When some else is footing the bill, why not consent to the extra tests, medications, procedures, etc., even when prudence would recommend some fiscal restraint?

Medicine and the Law

Few people outside the medical profession realize the litigious nightmares that all too often await doctors – even the most conscientious among them – should they (heaven forbid!) make a mistake when treating a patient. For some reason, we place doctors and other health care professionals on an ivory pedestal, believing that any decent physician should be literally incapable of making a medical misjudgment or providing a less-than-perfect surgery outcome. And then, when a physician does make a mistake (after all, they are, in fact, human), well, heaven help him or her. In addition to having to pay untold amounts for “malpractice insurance,” the utter terror of being sued, which seizes upon many doctors, causes them to make many wasteful decisions – but, can you really blame them? A perfect example of this problem is seen in the field of obstetrics, which is particularly vulnerable to litigious backlash, since people have largely come to expect the “perfect baby.” In the United States, one in every three births is done through Cesarean section, and while the c-section is surely a life-saving procedure in limited circumstances, it is a surgery that is abused by the frequency in which it is employed and which poses unnecessary financial and physical risks to patients and society as a whole. But, as long as the c-section is viewed as the “safest” route in the event of a perceived obstetrical “emergency,” doctors, in an effort to safeguard themselves from the unscrupulous lawyers who breathe down their necks, will continue to utilize it, whether or not it is truly in the best interest of mother and child. What we desperately need in this country is tort reform to restrain the lawyers (and their clients) who wish to profit by abusing the law.

Corruption in the Medical Industry

Under the current system, it becomes far easier for doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies to raise their fees to artificially high levels, since they are well aware that the majority of patients are not paying the entirety of the cost out of their own pocket. When third party payment is involved, it gives those in the medical profession little incentive to lower fees (in an effort to satisfy the financial means of the average consumer), and conversely, creates incentive for doctors to order more tests, hospitals to offer countless medical interventions, and pharmaceutical companies to solicit drug after side-effect inducing drug. Hence, we have millions of Americans carefully – and I'll add expensively – treating myriads of symptoms with a half a dozen prescriptions – taking many of these drugs simply to counter the ill-effects of others. Additionally, the disdain commonly felt by many in conventional medicine toward alternative methods of care – everything from chiropractic care, midwifery, homeopathy, etc. - conditions the public to believe that only expensive (and often invasive) traditional medicine is able to alleviate their health ailments and that, furthermore, alternative methods of care are largely unsafe and even life-threatening.

Patients and (a Lack of) Self-Responsibility

In an age of instant gratification, America's love affair with the “pop-a-pill” mentality of the day makes perfect sense. Why submit oneself to tiresome – and sometimes distasteful – changes in diet, exercise, or lifestyle, when merely taking a pill could considerably lessen or possibly eliminate the symptoms of a disease or condition? It should come as no surprise that Americans have out-of-control health care costs, when, for example, after most women (and men) hear that I opted for natural, midwife-assisted child birth for my two children, they look at me incredulously and say, “Are you crazy not to take drugs?” or “How could you endanger your children's lives like that?” If we, as patients, rely so heavily on prescription drugs and expensive and (sometimes) unnecessary surgeries and procedures, all the while dismissing those who educate themselves to alternative (and proven) forms of care, how can we expect anything better than what we currently have: a costly and largely wasteful health care system?

The point of today's rant is this: it's true the health care system in America needs critical evaluation, but it is not the government's purview to “remedy” the situation. It is undeniable that much waste and abuse occurs in the realm of medical care, but to hand the reins over to the federal government (one of the most corrupt entities around), is merely to jump from the frying pan into the fire. It may be someone's idea of promoting quality health care to simply cry out for the federal government (which, through its absolutely stellar job in such areas as public education, retirement planning, etc., has instilled in all of us unshakable faith in their ability to manage anything) to “save” us, but it's certainly not mine – nor was it the mentality of our ancestors. If we wish to someday, years from now, inspire a sense of gratitude in our descendants, we must once again kindle a love of liberty, self-governance, and personal responsibility in ourselves and our fellows, and for once, shout out: “Yes, WE can!” without really meaning “Yes, the GOVERNMENT can!”