Two Doctors Share Their Expectations For Health Reform
Main Category: Health Insurance / Medical InsuranceAlso Included In: Primary Care / General Practice
Article Date: 02 Jul 2009 - 6:00 PDT
Two doctors with over 30 years of experience spoke with National Public Radio about how medicine has changed over their careers, and what they expect to see come out of the current health reform debate.
Dr. Greg Darrow, a family physician from New Mexico who favors a single-payer system, said the demands of the business-side of his group practice often interfere with the quality of his care. "Leave me alone, I know what I do best, which is to take good care of people," Darrow said. Sometimes, patients interfere, too, by demanding care they may not need, a pattern he blames on direct marketing by pharmaceutical companies and newly available technologies. In one scenario, Darrow envisions himself recommending ice for a patient's twisted knee, while the patient requests an MRI.
Dr. George Knaysi, a cancer surgeon from Virginia, says he believes "most people feel health care is a right, not a privilege," but that the prospects of rationing in health reform make him uncomfortable with some reform proposals. He anticipates the creation of a government-run insurance plan, but adds, "I think there are too many people in this country who are middle class and upper-middle class who are not going to be willing to sit through long waiting lines." Rising costs - which Knaysi says haven't kept pace with reimbursements - will eventually force the American health system to squeeze administrative costs and limit care options to remain sustainable. However, he anticipates a balancing act to accommodate patients who want to pay out of pocket for the most expensive treatments (Block, 6/30).
This information was reprinted from kaiserhealthnews.org with kind permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives and sign up for email delivery at kaiserhealthnews.org.
© Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Visit our health insurance / medical insurance section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
11 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/156156.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/156156.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (1)
Public/Private Option Required For Reform
posted by Bill Watson on 2 Jul 2009 at 12:16 pmPrivate insurance systems can not compete with government’s ability to provide low cost funding to pay for health care, a national sales tax would be the best source, nor can private hospitals and care facilities compete with government owned facilities staffed by government employed doctors and health care providers to provide high quality low cost care and medications.
A dual public/private choice health care reform system in which all government funded programs would be distributed through government hospitals and clinics could control costs and outcomes to save hundreds of billions of dollars annually from the $2.5trillion now spent, and no one would be left without care, nor would seniors, Medicare and Medicaid recipients suffer from the Presidents proposals to cut $600billion in spending over the next ten years in order to pay for his convoluted forced insurance health care plan.
It is not a level playing field with government competing against private insurance and for profit care providers for patients, nor should it be.
Health care reform serving individuals, businesses, taxpayers and the national economy should be the beneficiaries of this home court advantage.
In the public sales tax funded plan:
Every individual who wants free public care and medications should have it period.
Every business one truck plumber or General Motors who selects public care for their employees should have no obligations financial or otherwise to be involved in health care.
Private health care's roll in public/private reform should be to attract every client they can who would find their services so compelling that patients would pay good money to use them rather than take free public care.
Private systems would be rid of indigent care or any other loss producing government imposed mandates.
A dual public/private health care reform system has no equals or even a close contender to provide a world class solution for reform.
It is time for the President, Legislators, American businesses, unions, AARP, churches, banks, financial institutions, insurance companies and private health care companies to become pragmatic and do a true fix for the sake of producing healthy citizens and a robust economy.
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.




