I heart our healthcare

By

Filed Under General on Apr 24 

Dr Obama

While convalescing from my recent injury last month, I read with great interest a piece by Michelle Maulkin concerning the tragic accidental death of Natasha Richardson while skiing in Canada. Maulkin makes a case that the nationalized health care system, or Canadacare, let down the Richardson family in their moment of need.

Let me be upfront. I am not assigning direct blame to Canadacare; nor am I saying they were negligent in any outright or overt way with the case. I also love Canada; my wife and I honeymooned there, and the people were wonderful.

That being said, I think there is legitimate consideration that what happened in Canada could happen here in the US in the future, considering the Great Bureaucrat/Physician (that would be Pres Obama, not God) wants us to model our care more like the Canadians & Europeans.

What caught my eye in the article was the word neurosurgeon. I discovered their full array of talents recently when I had a tube the size of your coaxial cable TV wire inserted into my lower back and used to trim away all the wasted material that had ruptured out of my disk. These guys don’t just do brain surgery; they do all kinds of intense, sensitive, delicate surgeries, especially anything regarding the nervous system—like your head and spine. You don’t want anyone else doing it for you, and when you need someone for a procedure like that, it’s great to have them around.

That’s the point of the Maulkin article. Because of socialized medicine, the desire for doctors to specialize—meaning enduring another decade of training and development beyond med school before being accredited and practicing on their own—is greatly deterred when all incentives (including financial to recuperate the cost of all that training) are removed to keep the costs down, and artificial price and procedure controls dictated by some central planning bureaucracy are installed.

Canada is greatly understaffed with neurosurgeons (something like a 70% shortage based on population), like the kind Natasha Richardson needed, and the kind that are in my own hometown hospital. A neurosurgeon would have made certain examinations, and done certain tests at the onset that could have more quickly determined her condition—with the greater possibility of saving her.

A neurosurgeon rendered me functional, mobile, and pain-free. My family was overjoyed. A neurosurgeon could have treated Natasha in the initial stages of her injury – and possibly saved her family’s grief.

I understand that we have legitimate needs for people to get access to health care, even without having insurance from a job loss or some other reason. I’m not heartless in seeing the need for that. My question is this: Why must we wreck the quality of care for millions of others of us in the name of rendering better access to the small percentage in that situation?

That’s exactly where the mighty O wants to go with our health care. And I for one think that is reckless.

Comments