Private health insurance, length of stay in hospitals, specialization, technology, and hospital care have undergone significant changes, shifts, or alternations in our health care system. Each of these areas in our health care system affect the rich, the “middle class” and the poor. The changes, shifts, or alternations that have occurred in the health care
system have eliminated the uninsured poor and the poor from receiving proper and necessary health care, limited the “middle class” to receiving specified care from specific physicians and hospitals that cover their visits and treatments through their private health insurance and continued to provide the rich with extraordinary, elaborate and sophisticated care that, of course, is affordable for them. These five changes, shifts or alternations in our health care system illustrate that advantages and disadvantages exist.
New technological devices and equipment were important in the advancements that exist in the health care system. Technology has allowed for the early detections of diseases and illnesses that can be treated or cured by the use of CT scanners or MRIs (Magnetic resonance imaging). Over the last half century, new and improved scientific equipment have allowed for more detailed treatment of illnesses and diseases such as tuberculosis, cancer, AIDS, diabetes, and heart disease. Technology has given physicians such as surgeons and the convenience of using X-rays to determine if unseen illness or injury have occurred, using antibiotics to fight infection, and using anesthesia to numb pain during surgery. These types of technological inventions have given doctors and other medical personnel more depth into treating patients’ illnesses and diseases. While technology improves every day, the prices paid to purchase these upgraded devices continues to rise.
This technology was one of the leading reasons that hospital care improved over the last half century. Just twenty years ago and even now today, people resist the idea of entering hospitals for fear of not receiving proper care and attention. But, with time came the need for a more sterile and controlled environment by both patient and doctor. At one time in this century doctors donated their time and efforts to assisting the sick in hospitals. Many patients especially those who were poor were in advanced stages of sickness by the time they had been admitted to hospitals. The situation could easily be compared to that of a scientist and his experiment, for instance, the doctor was the scientist, while each patient was an experiment. The doctors used the patients as learning tools to diagnose and treat unfamiliar illnesses. As patient’s felt more secure in going to hospitals for care, more “middle class” patients became willing to pay for the services provided. This procedure was both beneficial and detrimental to the proper caring of patients.
It allowed for doctors to expand their knowledge of diseases and illnesses and to allow for scientists to do more studies into the treatment of these new founded diseases. This gave some physicians like surgeons the power to choose hospitals and to demand improvements in equipment, operating rooms and staff as well as creating a dependency of hospitals for paying patients and highly recognized physicians. This experimentation as seen by some was necessary to bring about change and improvements in medicine, while on the other hand, endangering and costing many patients their lives because of the doctors need to test a scientist’s presumed form of treatment or by misdiagnosing an illness due to a lack of knowledge or poor judgment on his or her part. This power brought on the existence of specialization.
Specialization in the health care system provided health care personnel with more opportunity for higher pay and prestige with limited competency. This rise in specialization increased the number of people in the medical profession as well as increasing the cost to patients for selective care. This division of labor eliminated the trust, value and respect that once surrounded and identified the doctor as a source of answers to maintaining health. There are hundreds of titles that specify, individual medical personnel such as doctor, physician, medical receptionist, medical clerk, registered nurse, nurse’s aide, medical social worker, counselor, administrator, technician, therapist or specialist. In specialization, the benefit that exist is that there is one doctor who is more knowledgeable in that specific medical area and therefore is more qualified to treat your problem. The disadvantage for the patient is that you pay more money for that selected doctor than you would to go to a regular physician. It costs a high price for quality care.
This idea of paying a large sum of money for quality care is what most Americans wish existed in our health care system. Instead, we are forced to pay a high price for private health insurance that is not valued by most people as effective and considerate to our health conditions and financial situations. Private health insurance has excluded the poor who cannot afford to invest worthwhile money into a system that would lighten the load of worry about health conditions, doctor visits and possible hospital care. Private insurance discriminates against poor people and those with “high risk health conditions”. This discrimination includes disadvantaged minorities, older workers, “high risk” people like those with chronic conditions, lower income workers and employees and employees working for small businesses. Before the widespread use of this form of insurance, poor, middle class, and rich people had different ways of paying for health care, but at least had an option. Poor people could at least pay doctors by working or exchanging food for medical services. This allowed for all to have a better way to receive medical services.
San Fran: Heaven & Hell on Earth – seton health systems
Chaos all over San Francisco…”Drug deals happening in front of the court house and men smoking marijuana in front of a police station….” What’s happening?! :-O
Last November 19, 2008, as my father was watching Fox news, a newscaster reported the terrible sights/events he witnessed at San Francisco. He even concluded that San Francisco is much worse than New York City. He announced that at least in New York City the dangerous things are not as prevalent as the ones in San Francisco, California. He said that even in daylight one could not be safe* there because you could get hurt just by being at the wrong side of the street. *(The “safe” refers to those for the rest of us who like a (illegal) drugs-free America)
As for those who would like to be left alone for their freedom/right to do whatever they want, San Francisco might be the Garden of Eden/Heaven –just right for you. If the report is what they seem, San Fran, Cali. is the perfect place to do what most of us would consider illegal acts. When I heard of this news, I could NOT believe what I heard! :yikes:
I have relatives in California and some near in San Francisco so I was worried. If the law enforcement / police aren’t doing a thing to prohibit what really is going on…well, they are not doing what they are SUPPOSED to do. :angry:
These people should be locked up unless there is a law passing the legal or the public use of marijuana –which I doubt there is…