Tag

health care reform

To Be Young and Invincible

By | Health | No Comments

After a year of AmeriCorps, living in poverty while dealing with Hopkins staff and students and Baltimore city youth (all intimidating in their own way), I do feel quite powerful and invincible. I’m moving to Africa and the world is mine for the taking! According to Joel Stein’s The Me Generation such narcissism and self-confidence is beneficial since it causes myself and others born between 1980 and 2000 to think that we can change the world for the better. At the same time, such traits are becoming a barrier to the success of the Affordable Care Act.

The Department of Health and Human Service recently announced a video contest, pioneered by the non-profit The Young Invincibles, that will give up to $30,000 in prizes to winners who convince the millennials to sign up for health insurance. A little bit of peer education – smart idea. Getting people ages 18-30 is an integral part of making Obamacare work and keeping critics at bay. Having healthy people to pay for insurance (or medical care of the poor) is a sacrifice that all other countries with national health care consider a no-brainer. And it should be. Getting young healthy people to pay for insurance means keeping insurance costs lower for everyone else (ideally).

Most critics have already been complaining about higher premiums costs under the ACA. But all premium increases (whether it’s an increase to an already existing plan or a comparison of the new plans in the exchanges) will have to be approved and out-of-pocket costs will be capped, eventually (unfortunately this requirement will also be delayed another year). Another consideration is that all health insurance plans will have to have minimum benefits so even if you’re paying more, you may be receiving more too. Slowly but surely states are releasing estimates of health insurance rates from the exchanges, and depending where you live it could be more or less. Plus people up to 400% of Federal Poverty Level will be receiving subsidies for health insurance.

So if you’re young and invincible and will very soon need to start thinking about purchasing health insurance, the government has given over $67 million to organizations that will help people navigate the exchanges. United Way and Planned Parenthood are two of the most popular organization to receive grants while University of South Florida Association of Community Health Centers and United Way of Metropolitan Tarrant County (Texas) were among those to receive the highest amounts. Or if you want to start taking things into your own hands (feeding into those self-reliant stereotypes) these pointers from Kaiser Health News will serve you well. And if you’re still hesitant about even considering health insurance, this article from New York Magazine describing how vulnerable we truly are might change your mind.

Obamacare’s Delayed But Not a Disaster

By | Health | No Comments

It’s been a rough week for Obamacare. Last Tuesday the White House announced it would delay the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act until 2015, giving businesses with 50 or more employees an extra year to figure out how to provide health insurance. Because of this the law has been under major scrutiny since many critics believe this is proof of failure. Though this delay is definitely a huge setback for morale, there could be some good that comes out of it.

But first, the cons.

Besides all the remarks about how Obamacare is now a disaster and will never work, the delay will probably make the law more expensive next year. Those who don’t receive health insurance from their employer will now have to turn to the exchanges to find it. Plus these people are more likely to be lower-income workers meaning that many of them will be eligible for subsidies (incomes up to 400 percent of the Federal Poverty Level) which cost the government (and us) a lot more. And it gets a little worse than that too. When you apply for an exchange, the government is no longer requiring proof of income to qualify for the subsidies (I guess just try to keep that on the down-low). Paying for subsidies is one of the biggest expenses for Obamacare. And to help pay for them, businesses were going to help out, not just by providing insurance, but from fees for not following the employer mandate.

And there’s more. The national health insurance exchanges are falling behind schedule which are supposed to be ready by October 1st. The law requires at least two insurance companies for the exchange and at least one that’s not-for-profit. This is supposed to create more competition in order to lower premiums. So far, only the Blues (Blue Cross Blue Shield) have applied for the national exchange. But they already dominate the country without much competition.

Okay, deep breath — now the pros. I like to find the light in any negative situation.

First, this delay is a relief to many businesses and mostly those who are right on that 50 employee border. A lot of businesses revealed plans to cut workers or workers’ hours to offset costs of buying more insurance. Now they have extra time to figure out how to make the law work efficiently for them. Yes, you can argue that the Obama administration is once again being swayed by big business, but like it or not, businesses are made up of people too.

Second, the employer mandate doesn’t really affect that many people (relatively speaking). Most large businesses already provide health insurance (about 95 percent of them in fact) — it’s pretty much the backbone of the American health insurance system. And of the companies that do not provide insurance, about 10,000 out of six million, they employ only 1 percent of American workers.

Third, delaying a somewhat significant part of the law shows that there is room to adapt and reflect on what is working and what does not. Taking a year to reconsider and revise the employer mandate, in my opinion, leaves room to consider other options that may work better — reconsidering a livable wage (to make health insurance more affordable)? Reconsidering a public option? Reconsidering more comprehensive plans for medical cost control? Hey, a girl can dream.

All-in-all, the employer mandate delay is an eye sore for the image of Obamacare. Is it a complete disaster and train wreck? I don’t think so. If you look at it this way, the main goal of Obamacare is to expand coverage and non-insured employees at large companies will still be able to purchase insurance through the exchanges. Cost control was never a priority but maybe now the Obama administration will see that it should be.

IMAGE CREDIT. [www.golocalworcester.com].

Birth Control, Religion and Medicine

By | Health | No Comments

Religion and medicine were born together. From Asclepius, the Greek god of medicine, to Jesus to Christian Science to John Wesley to the Baptist Church. Few, I think would disagree that spiritual health is a key determinant in overall well-being. And religious groups have  often provided health care in their mission to serve the helpless. Recently, however, with the passage and upholding of the Affordable Care Act, religious values have clashed with medical reform, with the issue of birth control at the fore.

This past Friday, the Obama administration revealed a new proposal that would exclude religious employers from having to provide insurance plans with contraceptive coverage. The controversy will rage on; but it’s worth taking this moment when the issue is so forcefully in the public mind to explore the interwoven history of medicine, birth control and religion.

Pregnancy was one of the first non-diseases to be hospitalized and medicated. It supported the growth of the hospital and the authority of medicine (giving rise to the idea that “doctor knows best”).  The transfer of the birth to a hospital is thought by some medical historians to have been the beginning of our over-medicated society. That theory makes even more sense now that birth control is officially labeled as preventative medicine and can be covered by insurance. Medical authority in this regard has reached its apex.

But with that authority have come abuses. In the mid-1950s, clinical trials in Puerto Rico were held to test the efficacy of the first birth control pill. Most of the women had no idea they were partaking in a clinical trial or of the horrible side effects. In the 1960s, the women of this tiny island would again be coerced into population control, but this time through sterilization. Puerto Rican officials distributed media to encourage women to get “la operacion.” But ill-informed consent on sterilization happened on America’s mainland too. Around this same time, ten Mexican-American women sued the Los Angeles County General Hospital for giving them unwanted sterilizations. In the 1978 case, Madrigal v. Quilligan, the judge ruled in favor of the hospitals because the doctors “acted in good faith.”

Ironically, though, faith has been at the heart of the American medical system for decades, albeit religious faith. Indeed, beyond birth control, religious groups have been both a spur and a barrier to universal health care. It started at the turn of the twentieth century when hospital administrators usually gave away beds to wealthy friends or socialites. Religious and racial discrimination prompted faith groups such as Catholics and Jews to form their own hospitals, yet they still served the population at large and not solely their own denomination.

But as historian of medicine Paul Starr notes, “the denominations that do build their own schools and hospitals tend to be those that see themselves as deeply at odds with the dominant culture.” Because of this strong “cultural heterogeneity” or culture clash, hospitals in the United States have been harder to control by one entity, such as the government, as most universal health care systems are. In fact, in countries where there is one dominant religion, hospitals are far more likely to be run by the state.

And as the United States moves to a somewhat more state-controlled medical system, the age-old debate over the bounds of contraception still raises barriers to universal care. Even the Ancient Greeks struggled with the question of abortion – Aristotle countenanced abortion within forty days of conception for a male, and eighty for a female (women taking longer to gain a soul), but many Greeks opposed it completely because they conceived of embryos as nothing more or less than tiny people.

No doubt the controversy will persist long into the future. The Obama administration’s proposed amendment currently includes only non-profit faith employers, meaning the religious owner of a private company or the devout executive officer of a corporation will have no such exemption. So expect more exceptions to be made. For many women, birth control will continue to be free, but lower-income women working at religious institutions will be denied that access, meaning that our health care system will fall short once again of being universal.


 

IMAGE CREDIT. The Rag Blog.