Health Care Confusion

When it comes to health care everyone seems to be up in arms about something whether they are for or against the current House bill. Along with the emotion has come a lot of confusion. In my discussions with people both online and off I've noticed that the first obstacle that needs to be overcome is miscommunication. Here are the top three items I see people being most confused about.

1) Health Care vs. Health Insurance.

These terms are not interchangeable though people seem to use them as though they are. Health insurance is a premium you pay in advance to ensure a limited economic exposure in the event your health takes a turn for the worse. It shouldn't be used to cover every day events or menial costs but instead should be purchased to avoid catastrophic events from plunging you into bankruptcy under a mountain of hospital bills.
Health care is a service provided to human beings by other human beings. Too many of us don't recognize that but instead believe it to be some sort of magical creature that comes hopping out of the woods when you're hurt to blow colorful rainbows on all your injuries: It's free, plentiful and we're entitled to it.
The problem is it doesn't work like that. Care is provided by someone who has $100 grand in student loans to pay off, a mortgage and their own family to provide for. When you receive care you're paying for the doctor's knowledge, their education, their staff, their malpractice insurance, their expenses, their rent and everything else that goes along with it. When you have your blood drawn draw it is processed by a technician, someone with their own bills. When you're prescribed a medication, that drug was researched by a company for years on end, all the while paying their researchers and their rent and their staff. When you have an X-ray, you have it on a machine someone else had to research, design, manufacture, transport, house and run.
When you think about health care in these terms it is easier to understand why this service tends to be expensive. That's not to say we should be accepting when our system out prices people with limited income, but it does change our perception of the problem. Too many people think they posses a 'right' to health care but that's just an easy way of saying you have the right to another human being providing you a service. Possessing a right to another's work isn't health care, it's slavery. No one has that right.

2) Government System vs. Status Quo.

Often times when discussing the new House bill my opposition to it is taken as an endorsement of the status quo. I'm convinced this is a natural reaction by those who are looking more for someone to debate than they are for an actual solution to the problem. Otherwise their reaction would be to inquire about my position rather than to project some sort of love of insurance companies onto me. It is essential that we approach this issue with open minds. We can't authentically discuss the future ramifications of any plan if we're not only presenting our view but also assuming what everyone else's opinion is. People tend to make the assumption that if you're against government control you're for insurance companies because they don't see any other option. This leads to confusion #3.

3) Our Options: Government or Insurance Companies.

Sometimes it is difficult to think outside the box. Because of our limited perspective we aren't always able to see options that aren't immediately presented to us. For this reason people tend to frame this debate as a fight between those who want Government control of our health care provision and insurance company control. That isn't the case.

One of the main difficulties in our current situation is that the consumer is no longer paying for the product. For instance, if you go to the store and buy a candy bar you're telling the manufacturer it is worth 90 cents to you. But when you go to the doctor rarely are you paying for the service you receive. Most often an insurance company is paying for it. To make the matter more difficult is the fact that a lot of us don't even pay for our insurance, our employer does. So not only do we not pay for the care we receive but we don't even pay for the service to pay for our care! Going back to the candy bar illustration, how difficult would it be to establish what a candy bar really costs if you hired someone to hire someone to buy it for you? It'd be impossible. The situation would quickly get out of control as the manufacturer would automatically realize they can start charging more for the product because the consumer really isn't aware of what they are paying. The solution is to make people aware of a third option besides just government and insurance companies: returning the consumer to their rightful place and give them control of their own health care options. Not only would this help clear the confusion about prices, but it would give us the consumer a lot more control over what care they do receive. The 'manufacturer', in this case the health care provider such as your doctor or hospital, would have to adjust their service to appeal to the largest possible consumer base. A drastic change in how health care is provided would be expected as the industry makes the adjustment. Nonetheless in order to have a productive conversation it is important that the average American voter realizes that their is at least a third option beyond just government or insurance company control.

Solving the difficulties in our health care industry won't happen quickly, but in order to get to a point where we can actually have the necessary conversations we all need to get on the same page. While understanding these three points wont get everyone there, I think it'd be a great first step.