As Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser proposes to replace the troubled Washington, D.C.-based United Medical Center, which includes nearly $300 million in construction expenses, a costly hospital at taxpayer expense may not be the most effective way to fulfill these underserved residents' health needs, The Washington Post editorial board argues.
The proposal calls for a smaller replacement hospital that would open in 2023, with 106 beds as opposed to the current 200-plus beds. For this reason, administration officials are contending the project would be economically viable, the article noted.
Although the city should play a role in solving the medical disparities vulnerable residents face, The Post argues building a hospital without considering alternate options is misguided.
"Think of what could be done with $300 million invested in preventive care, improved maternity and infant health programs, enhanced mental-health services, targeted acute care and other methods that have proved successful elsewhere," the op-ed reads. "The political tunnel vision propelling the bid for a new hospital needs to end, and there should be thoughtful discussion of how best to serve health needs east of the river."