Healt İnsurance

A staple of the conservative critique of universal coverage is that having health insurance does not equal access. The corollary is that the. Already assured access to care from doctors and hospitals willing to take care of them to a non-profit basis and of "safety net" institutions

This argument is not new, after he made years before the Affordable Care Act became law. In 2007, said the Council for Affordable Health Insurance, that "universal coverage is not timely access":

"One of the false assumptions behind the push for universal coverage is that everyone has access to medical care. During the first appear, start within a short time to grow, the waiting time and start the access and quality, as the government limits decrease health care financing. Moreover, do the uninsured access to care ... some of which are free or at reduced cost in public hospitals. would be better with insurance coverage, but the uninsured can get care and want. "

Writing for the libertarian Cato Institute, Michael Tanner argues similarly that "health insurance does not mean universal access to health care., In practice many countries promise universal coverage but ration care or have long waiting lists for treatment."

Dr. Marc Siegel, a physician, takes the argument even further, blogging in the National Review that he instruct not only to the government health insurance for all objects, but rather the idea of ​​health insurance:

"The individual mandate is the glue that holds together from Obamacare shoehorning in young, healthy people who do not know .. the health insurance for the sick and elderly, who do not pay, but an even bigger problem than the mandate lies in the cumbersome insurance itself Obamacare will be much worse by the number of people who are insured extended, the procedures and other objects (such as contraception) covered, and is the expansion of government involvement in making it all. "

(I find it ironic that many conservatives, the Obamacare because they advocate contradict result in more people getting health insurance for converting Medicare to defined contribution program, where the government is you-you it-to buy a voucher for private health insurance ! guess)

But let's get back to the main argument: that health insurance does not equal access to care, and that the insured care anyway.

It's true that health insurance companies must ensure not only access-you enough doctors to take care of patients, for one thing, but the evidence also clear that without health insurance is consistently associated with less access and poorer outcomes.

Here's what the Institute of Medicine noted in his landmark 2009 report, "America's Uninsured Crisis: Consequences for Health and Health Care":

"A robust body of well-designed, high-quality research provides conclusive results about the harms of being uninsured and to gain the benefits of health insurance for children and adults. Despite the availability of some safety net services, there is a gap between the health needs people without health insurance and access to effective health care. This gap results in unnecessary illness, suffering and even death. "

What's with those long waiting times for care in countries that have universal coverage? Well, there's more waiting for elective surgery in some of them, but the United States does not compare very favorably even when measured on elements such as access to family doctors and eliminating it because of the cost.

In 2011, the Commonwealth Fund report and chart pack compares U.S. health care system with eight other countries (all in some form of universal coverage have), and found that that was U.S. second worst waiting time to get an appointment when them sick, third last in always care after hours without an emergency room, and had the highest proportion of people who reported that because of the cost, she did not get medical care, not fill a prescription or skipped medical test, treatment or follow-up.