The problem of healthcare costs is deeply political and cultural

Below are the rates for my student health insurance coverage for the coming year.

I’m newly married, so my spouse and I will be enrolling together. That means that the total cost of health insurance for our family of two will be $7,522. Even though I’ve been paying $3,000 a year for my own insurance, $7,522 inspired some sticker shock. Our care is pretty heavily “managed” in this plan, allowing only three appointments per year outside of the University Health Services, so this seemed particularly expensive to me.

The problem of healthcare costs is deeply political and cultural

Click to enlarge

But the truth is that $7,522 for two people is probably below average. Health costs are rapidly approaching $20,000 a year for a family of four. In our case, though, we don’t yet have the benefit of an employer covering 60% of those costs:

The problem of healthcare costs is deeply political and cultural

That we find ourselves at the financial mercy of our healthcare system is a small irony since I am a part of that system. Knowing that average health care costs have doubled in the last nine years, I am worried about how much our insurance will cost next year. I have heard many prominent physicians say that it will fall on my generation of doctors to address this problem. So what does the future hold?

Some are hopeful. Atul Gawande’s Harvard Medical School graduation speech was about the potential that working in teams, like pit crews, has for improving health care and reducing costs. I agree with him. My friend and classmate Ian Metzler wrote on the The Health Care Blog recently about the need for education, improved clinical judgement, decision-support, institutional leadership and payment reform to help make care less expensive. He is also right.

But will all of this really “bend the cost curve?” What makes us think that these savings won’t simply lead to higher margins for providers, health systems or health insurers? Until we address the enormous cost of a private insurance system, either through stricter regulation of insurance premiums or through a public health insurance plan, we’ll have a limited impact on costs.

We also have a deep problem in our national consciousness. Too many of us, including myself before medical school, proceed with the notion that medicine should be able to fix anything and prolong our physical health indefinitely. We are willing to try obscure and expensive treatments with marginal benefit. As a society we have to accept the limits of what medicine can do. We need to come to better terms with our mortality and the inevitability of physical break-down and emotional loss.

For a long time, I wanted to believe that our problem with healthcare costs could be solved with technocratic expertise. But the fact is that our problem is deeply political and cultural. Young doctors need to realize this: working in teams like a pit crew is a start, but what we really need is to change the direction of the race.

Nathan Favini is a medical student who blogs at A Stranger in this World, and can be reached on Twitter @natefavini.

Submit a guest post and be heard on social media’s leading physician voice.

email

  • JPB

    Until we are ready to honestly discuss the impact of for-profit medical organizations on our costs, we will get more of the same unfathomable increases in this industry!

  • Kristin

    There are some things the private market is good at. Providing social services is not one of them. We don’t look to the private market for welfare, to help our homeless, to increase social justice–why would we look to the private market for our health insurance?

    And yet there are so many people who insist that capitalism, which, left unchecked, produces industrial wastelands, destroys ecosystems, and results in child laborers with tuberculosis, will somehow magically fix the health-care market. That argument ignores the nature of corporations. Their sole purpose is to generate gains for stockholders–they have a legal obligation to do that. Until the system is reengineered to eliminate that motive, health care will continue to be about providing gains to insurance company stockholders. The rest of the problems follow naturally and logically from that initial profit motive.

  • http://www.BocaConciergeDoc.com Steven Reznick MD

    My wife and I , healthy in our early 60′s pay $1200 a month for health insurance with a $7000 per year deductible. Putting physicians into pit crews or teams is not going to cut the cost of healthcare. Despite the astronomical cost of health insurance I still believe in capitalism and free market economics with some regulation. Primary care practices are not raising the cost of health care or insurance benefits. In fact government regulation has gone a long way to destroying financial incentives in primary care and the ability to PCP’s to earn a reasonable living. Its one of the reasons why students abandon primary care for specialty care
    Look at the administrative costs of private insurance companies as opposed to Medicare. Look at the CEO salaries . Look at the cost of care in the last few months of life of our extreme elderly. Look at the amount of money Medicare doles out annually and never recovers on non physician criminal fraud because they never developed an independent computer payment and security system like private credit card companies developed.
    I have children your age who struggle with health insurance costs like you do. I feel badly for you and and for them but before I go reoroganizing medicine into NASCAR like pit crews I would like to see organized medicine take on the low hanging fruit and at the same time confront society on issues of end of life care, tort reform, investing in unproven alternative care , preventing non physician and non institutional fraud and then lets see what things actually cost.

  • Penny

    You forgot to mention one thing. In my province we have paid thousands and thousands of dollars in severance pay to people hired for the health department who were considered “not ideal” for the position, for whatever reason. It has seemingly gotten to the point where people apply for this job only for the benefit of receiving this type of pay for “jobs not well done” and then they immediately go on to get a better job after collecting all of that money.

    After you spend all that health money on severance pay and on electronic computer systems, there is none left for — oh yes, patients! They were supposed to fit into the health budget too somewhere, weren’t they?

  • http://dan@robinowitz.com Daniel P. Robinowitz

    Excellent and well written!

  • jacomment

    Health insurance has nothing to do with capitalism – health insurance companies are exempt from anti-trust laws. Which means, they can compare and fix prices between themselves. No other industry has this right in the US. If there was true capitalism, prices for health insurance would be lower. I believe Ted Kennedy tried to get rid of this loophole, but not so the current Obama plan.

  • Dorothy Green

    Pit crews? Is that really what you mean? There are many models of organizations like the Mayo and Cleveland clinics, university hospitals etc that, to me, offer better care than a physician, practicing alone. These are systems integrated into communties, medical schools and with hospitals – teams, where physicians share with one another, refer when out of their league and patients benefit from this collective knowledge. Physicans do or could make respectable salaries when functioning as a team.

    If the private insurance companies where outlawed like every other country for basic care, that would go a long way to more reasonable insurance costs.

    We have the technology and the knowledge to construct an integrated electronic medical record program – it is the “free market” as the only way that prevents it. Computer programmers don’t care about integration. Lawyers make big deals about protecting information that could, like it is in other countries, used to help populations, and has nothing to do with “an individual’s private medical information.

    Our adherence to so called exceptionalism prevents us from taking good examples from other countries (we have done this for a long time). The US did take the lead with tobacco smoking and other countries took from our lead but, because Big Ag is one of the owners of Congress, we will not be leaders in decreasing the chronic preventive diseases caused by poor diet which in turn is caused by the addictive substances of processed sugar, fats and high amounts of sodium). This RISK has surpassed the RISK of smoking as cause of escalating healthcare costs. Other countries have already taken the lead in many aspects of this global problem.

    And what are we doing about end of life issues – not a heck of a lot. Doctors and hospitals want the money they can get by prolonging life at the expense of a person’s pain, and taxpayer dollars, families have unrealistic expectations as long as Medicare and caid will pay, polititians shout “death panels” when small efforts are made in the name of whatever they are shouting about.

    These last two statements are the major reasons why our healthcare costs will cause us to go off the financial cliff.

Trending