Solutions to Controversies Surrounding Healthcare in the United States - Essay Example

Proposed Solutions to Controversies Surrounding Healthcare in the United s Proposed Solutions to Controversies Surrounding Healthcare in the United States The overall fundamental problem with the healthcare system in the United States is the ever-rising cost of healthcare. It is important for the United States to carefully formulate and proceed to implement policies that will help the country reduce the over 17% of gross domestic product, or about $ 2.5 trillion that the country uses on healthcare each year (Francis, 2008). At present there are a number of solutions that can be implemented so as to resolve the current controversy surround the provision of healthcare within the United States. These include: Make Changes to the Tax Code: Congress should look into changing the federal tax code so as to allow individuals to be able to deduct their healthcare expenses in a similar manner to that used by privately insured self employed individuals and businesses. This change will serve to not only give employees the freedom for them to be able to purchase their own insurance but also allow for employers to greatly decrease their overheads which will subsequently result in their being able to offer higher wages. By offering individual insurance coverage that is not tied to employment, it will now be possible for people to keep their healthcare coverage even as they move from one job position to the other or from one state to the other (Feldman, 2001). Enact Favorable Tort Reform: Despite the fact that medical outcomes within the United States are actually no worse, and are in many way better as compared to other countries it is estimated that about 20% of the United States’ healthcare budget is normally spent on the legal system through court costs, attorney fees, malpractice insurance premiums and defensive medicine (Stark, 2012; U.S. Congress, OTA, 1993). The legal system in the United States is seen to be burden hospital and doctors in a harder manner as compared to legal systems in other countries. The exorbitant costs that medical practitioners and hospitals are faced with can be identified as being somewhat responsible for the high medical services fees that are charged by hospitals and doctors in their attempts to earn enough money to pay their exorbitant medical malpractice insurance premiums. Setting in-place meaningful caps on the non-economic damages that hospitals and medical practitioners are liable to pay in the event that they happen to face legal action, is widely considered to be the best sout9ion to the current medical malpractice legal awards lottery. Other measure that can be undertaken to curb this trend is the elimination from the medical profession of all the doctors whose actions and carelessness fuels such lawsuits. Hospitals should be mandate to report any serious errors made by their physicians. This information should then be publicized so that persons seeking medical care can make informed choices and avoid error-prone doctors. As a result of the fact that not all unfavorable outcomes of medical procedure are due to error, and the fact that certain medical disciplines such as neurosurgery and obstetrics tend to usually involve situations of greater risk as compared to other disciplines, independent review boards can be setup. These review boards should not only be comprised of physicians, but also scientist trained in fields such as biology, chemistry, forensics and statistics to aid in the review of alleged malpractice cases. This will essentially be a better option as compared to simply leaving such cases to the law courts or worse still, to hospitals and universities to police themselves as these institutions have been proven to be unable to effectively conduct this function. Elimination of some State Mandates: Some of the mandates that have been implemented by state policy makers often restrict the choices of patients in the purchase of individual healthcare insurance. As opposed to simply offering patients a range of choices, mandates are designed to required that all individual medical plans be designed to essentially offer the same benefits to everyone, an aspect that is noted to have the effect of increasing costs for everyone. A common argument for the eliminate of some of the existing state mandates is why should a 25 year old single man be forced by state mandates to pay for obstetrical coverage (Stark, 2012). A reasonable step in the elimination of state mandates would be to allow for there to be interstate commerce in health insurance. This would enable people to freely purchase any of the available approved insurance plans from any company regardless of the state. The sudden increase in personal choices would force the insurance market to become more competitive resulting in reduced costs of insurance. Barriers to the Implementation of the Solutions There are a number of factors that might possibly act as barriers to the implementation of the proposed solutions. These barriers include: Resistance and Opposition from Hospitals and Medical Practitioners: The proposal requiring that hospitals be mandated to report any serious errors made by their physicians might possibly be met with oppositions from hospitals and doctors who might not wish to tarnish their public image. Reporting the serious errors made by physicians and making these reports public might have a number of economic disadvantages for hospitals and doctors who might start recording decreased numbers of persons seeking medical services from them. Government Bureaucracy: Government bureaucracy might potentially become a barrier to the elimination of some of the state mandates as the elimination of these mandates might take longer than necessary. This might potentially be based on the premise that the removal of some of these mandates might take a considerable amount of time as policymakers’ debate on them. In the resolution of the controversies surrounding healthcare in the United States, I greatly support the enactment of favorable tort reforms designed to cap the payments made for medical malpractice suits. This will reduce the amount of insurance premiums that are usually paid by doctors in the country an aspect that will subsequently cause hospitals and doctors to start charging lower rates for the medical services offered. An example of the successful application of this solution is evidenced in the case in the state of Idaho that has consistently used this solution to successfully help in reducing the healthcare costs (Pozgar, 2012). References Feldman, D. R. (2001). American Health Care: Government, Market Processes, and the Public Interest. Transaction Publishers. Francis, L. (2008). The Right Medicine. Fideli Publishing Inc. Pozgar, D. G. (2012). Legal aspects of health care administration. Sudbury, Mass.: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Stark, R. (2012). Solutions to Our Health Care Crisis. Retrieved on August, 13, 2014 from http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/opinion/solutions-our-health-care -crisis U.S. Congress, OTA. (1993). Impact of Legal Reforms on Medical Malpractice Costs. DIANE Publishing. Read More