The United States (U.S.) health system has business as a higher priority than health care. This argument by no means takes away credibility or authenticity from the quality of care that healthcare workers give, but more so highlights factors that play a role in elevating healthcare costs through a business-oriented mindset. The three criteria that will be focused on involve the necessity of health insurance for the American public, hospitals seeking to make a profit, and lack of government intervention to combat elevated prices.
Health insurance is defined as a contract that requires an insurer to pay some or all of a person's healthcare costs in exchange for a premium. It is a vital need in the U.S. given the high cost of healthcare making it impractical for most individuals to pay out of pocket. This feeds into a never ending cycle as the need for health insurance in the first place rises from the expensive nature of health care. Due to the possibility of illness or injury, individuals are virtually forced to make these regular payments to insurance companies. Insurance providers companies increase their prices based on what the market dictates, and that is often dependent on prices of medical procedures. One could argue that health insurance is beneficial as it covers necessary medical treatments, but the issue of needing this financial security could be avoided altogether if the cost of medical interventions were reduced.
Health care facilities also view themselves as a business and just like any other business, they want to make a profit. The American healthcare system provides a simple way for this to occur, providing treatment to those that are privately insured as opposed to plans like medicare [1]. The preference of patients allows for more revenue to be generated with this business model. It can be argued that the incentive to generate more profit is to allow extra resources to be poured into front office material and other relationships with 3rd parties, attributed to their costs. However, in actuality in order to continue to make profit at the higher rate, the money comes out of patients' pockets as they upcharge the cost of various tests relative to other countries. An MRI for instance, is a test used to capture images of the body using magnetic fields. In the United States, the cost of an MRI is on average $1,119 while in Australia it is $215 and $181 in Spain [3]. While various factors play a role in determining this price point, such as cost of equipment and drug prices, the prices paint a picture of the discrepancy the American public faces in health care when compared to other nation’s populations.
Government intervention occurs in many other countries, such as South Korea, as a method to regulate the prices of healthcare as a whole. This is done by having national health insurance under the Korea Ministry of Health and Wellness. An average of 5% of income from an employer and employee is used to finance this national health insurance. Additionally, pharmaceutical companies are also regulated by the government [5]. This allows the government to make decisions that aren’t solely business incentives when determining prices of drugs. This forces hospitals to stray away from the prices that the market dictates to abide with the government laws. The effective nature of the South Korea model is shown as total health spending per capita as of 2019 was $3,384.16. The same metric can be used for other countries with governmental intervention, such as the United Kingdom which has a universal healthcare system called the National Health Service, where their spending per capita is $4653.06. Without such regulations, private hospitals would be able to drive up the prices of simple hospital equipment and as a result the total health spending per capita as of 2019 in the U.S was $11,071.72 [2]. While government intervention will provide numerous economical changes within the U.S, it can be done in a way to reach a middle ground that results in the reduction of medical expenses.
Given the highlighted areas, the argument that healthcare is not the primary priority of the United States healthcare system has some grounds. From a governmental standpoint,there are incentives to make a profit that are taking precedence. While there are some rationale to justify these actions, they are all backed by a greater financial objective rather than patient care.
References:
Hankin, A. (2021, September 8). How U.S. healthcare costs compare to other countries. Investopedia. Retrieved January 15, 2022, from https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/072116/us-healthcare-costs-compared-other-countries.asp
Health Systems Facts. just facts. no bias. HealthSystemsFacts.org. Health Systems Facts. (2022, January 10). Retrieved January 15, 2022, from https://healthsystemsfacts.org/?gclid=CjwKCAiA24SPBhB0EiwAjBgkhkkWa5pHZeEWPjA37BVRjpovK2vKQDuCwxaEVUq7pU6oRb01M2RiORoCl18QAvD_BwE
Kagan, J. (2021, December 30). What is health insurance? Investopedia. Retrieved January 15, 2022, from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/healthinsurance.asp
Kliff, S. (2020, May 15). Hospitals knew how to make money. then coronavirus happened. The New York Times. Retrieved January 15, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/us/hospitals-revenue-coronavirus.html
We should follow South Korea's example of how to provide a nation with healthcare. The CT Mirror. (2020, May 5). Retrieved January 15, 2022, from https://ctmirror.org/category/ct-viewpoints/we-should-follow-south-koreas-example-of-how-to-provide-a-nation-with-healthcare/