A new approach to news
Currently chillin’ at my favorite downtown university bookstore reading the new book by Stanford alum Brian Eule…
In other news, ran across a neat tool by Google called “Living Stories” that is in partnership with New York Times and Washington Post. It’s pretty exciting, and I really like the timeline that they provide you with all the articles that have been written on a particular topic! One example of its uses is helping to navigate the health care reform and all the various issues that are being debated and discussed. Go check it out!
Speaking of health care reform, I’m interested to see what the Democrats’ have come up to alter the idea of a public option. Overall, I can’t wait to see more specifics and less divisive battling between the two parties.
While I am a proponent of making sure that American citizens have access to health care to improve the livelihood of their health and those of their loved ones, I don’t know if a public option is necessarily the correct option. I understand that one of the argued benefits of having a public option will be offering a competitive piece to the health insurance market, but will it really help drive costs down for individuals, small businesses, and employers? Will it make it more compelling for people to utilize the healthcare that they will have? From personal experience, I know that there are individuals who don’t utilize their health care access because of either cultural beliefs, not wanting to “waste” money on something they can tough out, or because they just don’t quite understand what options they do have and how it is applicable to their health.
And where will we get doctors to care for all the people who will soon have insurance? I think we need to expand our healthcare support staff (PAs, NPs, etc.) to make sure that quality care is given to folks in the future. And another thing that concerns me (and does not necessarily have to do with whether or not a public option is a good thing or not) since we’re speaking of health care reform is the spending that is done on unncessary tests and procedures because either a physician feels the pressure to cover her butt against law suit or the prospect of incestives OR a patient requests for tests to be done because they otherwise don’t feel that they are being thoroughly cared for. I think a big part of health care reform that is missing from the public option, abortion, etc. debates is how we view health care and what we expect of it. Tests and procedures aren’t always the best solutions, but they certainly are fast and provide concrete (if not necessarily necessary or better) results. I think that there needs to be consideration on what health means, how we’ll acheive it, and what role health care and its providers play. I’d love to hear your thoughts!