Documentary on a Fix for the Healthcare System

[LeafByNiggle]

Now, if we didn’t have government occupational licensing would it be the wild west for medicine? My answer is no, because there are private organizations that do essentially the same thing without the entry barriers of government regulation. For example, malpractice insurers rate practitioners and base their premiums on their abilities and outcomes. A bad practitioner won’t be able to get malpractice insurance, nor would they be able to get hospital privileges, or get into managed care networks. All of these provide gatekeeping functions and arguably do a much better job than the government.

But the reason they can do their job is because of government regulation. A practitioner would not need to get malpractice insurance if there were no regulations requiring that he do so. He may not care about hospital privileges if he does not intend to work at a hospital (snake oil salesmen rarely do). Without regulation, a bad practitioner could bypass all these private gatekeepers and just work on his own, dealing directly and exclusively with his “patients” (i.e. suckers).

 

[stinkcat_14]

But the reason they can do their job is because of government regulation. A practitioner would not need to get malpractice insurance if there were no regulations requiring that he do so. He may not care about hospital privileges if he does not intend to work at a hospital (snake oil salesmen rarely do). Without regulation, a bad practitioner could bypass all these private gatekeepers and just work on his own, dealing directly and exclusively with his “patients” (i.e. suckers).

A practitioner who cares about his assets would get malpractice insurance, nor would it be difficult for a prospective patient to demand proof of malpractice insurance before agreeing to be a patient. While it is true that there will be some bad practitioners in the absence of regulation, we have to remember that regulation does not do much about bad practitioners now. So it is far from clear that we will have more bad practitioners without regulation than with regulation.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

A practitioner who cares about his assets would get malpractice insurance, nor would it be difficult for a prospective patient to demand proof of malpractice insurance before agreeing to be a patient.

When is the last time you asked to see proof of your doctor’s malpractice insurance?

While it is true that there will be some bad practitioners in the absence of regulation, we have to remember that regulation does not do much about bad practitioners now.

How do you know there would not be many more bad practitioners without regulation?

So it is far from clear that we will have more bad practitioners without regulation than with regulation.

And it is far from clear that we wouldn’t. But history tells us that before regulation there were many more incompetent practitioners.

 

[Viki63]

Credentials by themselves are not bad. The problem is where the government decides that you need an MD to prescribe antibiotics. The government has no competence in this domain. The result is higher costs with no corresponding benefits.

You should need an MD to prescribe antibiotics,. Even with this requirement, patients talk their MDs into prescribing way more abx than necessary, which is why many of them don’t work well any more.
MDs have the basic training to decide when and which abx to prescribe. As a nurse I don’t even want to deal with that (and legally, I can’t prescribe.)

.

 

[shockerfan]

Other countries can do it, without bankrupting either the country via taxes or the people.

Please don’t fall for the anti-“socialist” propaganda that the insurance companies put out. Single payer health care would be publicly funded, and privately delivered.

It is not socialism. In socialism, the healthcare industry would be owned by the government, and medical people would be employees of the government.
In single payer, doctors would work privately, but be paid a reasonable salary by our taxes.

.

Hi Viki,

You might have missed my question to this post. I believe I read that you are a nurse, and thus can provide an interesting insight:

1. What is a reasonable salary for a doctor that you are suggesting?
2. I would assume that nurses would also be paid a reasonable salary by our taxes…what would that be?
3. If a doctor gets paid by taxes (i.e. government), how are they not government employees? What exactly is private about them if they don’t determine their own salary by the prices they set?

Thanks!