Universal health vs Patient choice

As we all know, America's healthcare system has some challenges. Some are political (Affordable Care Act) and others are structural (high medical premiums).

And with healthcare costs now 150% as much per capita as the next most expensive healthcare system (Norway), it's no wonder some people question the viability of the US health system.

But would swapping to a universal healthcare system make us any better off?

When we look to other countries such as the United Kingdom, it's tempting to feel envious of their health system. After all, they receive free healthcare just by turning up to the hospital. That means there's no forms to fill in, no insurance to organize and no bills to pay. If you break your leg, you call an ambulance, get taken to the emergency room and are seen to without question.

But the downside to this type of universal healthcare system is that it eats up money and puts the nation as a whole in a deficit if it's not managed adequately. In fact, the UK's national health service has a deficit of £2.4 Billion thanks to issues such as an ageing population, increasing obesity levels, migration and other emerging health concerns. As money is eaten up by a crumbling system, patient waiting times become longer, staff get paid less and care is ultimately compromised. And then there's the issue of tax. Universal health systems rely on tax payer's money to function. So, any time the system requires a reboot, it is the general public that foot the bill.

As it turns out, the Brits are now turning to a more Americanized system to unclog their waiting rooms and better their quality of patient care through the concept of patient choice. Since the 1950s Britain has had compulsory dental, optical and prescription charges, but this is now expanding through the implementation of optional maternity, physiotherapy, rehabilitation and elderly care services as well as much more. In fact, income from private patients rose 12% in 2012 and is continuing to grow.

So, if you want to jump the queue and can afford to do so, anyone in Britain can now be seen more rapidly at a cleaner, calmer, more efficient hospital without the hassle of waiting in line. This does, of course, create a two-tier system where wealth equals health and poverty equates to long waits and stretched facilities. An example of this might be allowing wealthy patients to skip surgery waiting lists in order to receive their treatment faster, bumping less financially fortunate patients further back in line and therefore increasing their risk of harm or even death – a concept that sits uncomfortably with much of the population. Some UK citizens are even travelling as far as Singapore for medical treatments, as the small island boasts some of the best medical facilities in the world.

The UK isn't a universal health anomaly. This dual tier medical trend is showing up in other countries renown for their universal health infrastructure. In Canada citizens who aren't keen on waiting, or would prefer a more personalized medical experience just need to pop across the boarder to the USA. More than 50,000 Canadian citizens a year are becoming medical tourists. Other Canadians are paying to jump the line for medical services such as MRI's.

You have to ask yourself, if universal healthcare we're so adequate, why is it that nations with universal healthcare are now seeing patients opt for private medical or medical tourism solutions? The American health system has a wealth of faults and problems, but given that universal health systems are implementing the kind of patient choice options the US already has on offer, it is only natural to wonder if health privatization is a critical component in implementing a healthcare structure that works.

Matthew Murray is the Managing Director of Notable, a business solutions firm based in Singapore. Notable helps companies incorporate in Singapore and matches them with clients looking for their services.

The views, opinions and positions expressed within these guest posts are those of the author alone and do not represent those of Becker's Hospital Review/Becker's Healthcare. The accuracy, completeness and validity of any statements made within this article are not guaranteed. We accept no liability for any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content belongs to the author and any liability with regards to infringement of intellectual property rights remains with them.

Copyright © 2024 Becker's Healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Cookie Policy. Linking and Reprinting Policy.

 

Featured Whitepapers

Featured Webinars