Surprised! ...Again
February 1, 2008 -- Many healthcare procedures are routine,
e.g. immunizations for kids and the
every-5-years-after-age-50-colonoscopy. If your doctor is doing her
job, these are ordered for you at entirely predictable times in your
life. Every American should be getting them. Budgeting and resource
allocation for these things can (and should) be rational and
planned. Why aren't they? In our present system, they seem to be
surprises every time. We must submit lengthy paperwork for insurance
claims, argue about what's covered, etc. Ridiculous.
Furthermore, there should be routine tracks for the various chronic
illnesses (with variations planned for differing degrees of
severity, complicating factors, and responses to treatment)
according to plans derived from medical evidence (best practices
based on outcomes).
It's silly that the predictable, plan-able procedures should be
regarded (from a financial standpoint) the same as the unpredictable
ones. Why are the paperwork and eligibility issues the same for a
vaccination as for a broken bone?
Money to pay for routine medical procedures should be budgeted for
each of us from birth. These procedures should be paid for by a fund
that's managed conservatively and whose inputs are known precisely
because its outputs are.
A second fund would cover non-routine healthcare, i.e. accidents and
acute diseases. The outputs of this fund are known less precisely
yet can be predicted by actuarial techniques.
Both funds should be fed from a progressive taxation mechanism. "To
each according to need, from each according to ability."
Yet we do none of this. It's hard to believe that we continue to be
so financially naive about healthcare!
Table of Contents
|
