Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Wasting time and ...
Everyone, and I do mean everyone, currently debating the status of health care is wasting their time, as the issue is presently being discussed. Without honing in on "end of life" care, nothing is going to change either the status quo or the direction our health care budget is going. This IS the cold hard fact that nobody appears to be interested in discussing. Most estimates place 2 out of every 3 dollars spent on "end of life" care. Everything else is merely subterfuge, period.
It is imperative that we define exactly how much of our heath care resources will go toward those approaching their respective life expectancies. Think of ourselves as a car...as maintenance increases with the age of the car, those costs get to the point where it is less expensive to purchase a new car. It is fiscally irresponsible to bankrupt this country in order to attempt to extend life expectancies on the margin. It becomes an economic decision over how to allocate our health care resources.
One constructive way of doing this is to establish some level of care we can afford for those that are approaching the end of their life expectancies. For example, perhaps we spend 60% on a person at their life expectancy relative to a 21 year old. Clearly the math can be made to work any number of ways, but this is one method of balancing our health care resources. Because we are discussing public funds, it IS absolutely necessary to make sure we are getting the best return possible.
Unless "end of life" care is addressed, everyone is just wasting their time.
Everyone, and I do mean everyone, currently debating the status of health care is wasting their time, as the issue is presently being discussed. Without honing in on "end of life" care, nothing is going to change either the status quo or the direction our health care budget is going. This IS the cold hard fact that nobody appears to be interested in discussing. Most estimates place 2 out of every 3 dollars spent on "end of life" care. Everything else is merely subterfuge, period.
It is imperative that we define exactly how much of our heath care resources will go toward those approaching their respective life expectancies. Think of ourselves as a car...as maintenance increases with the age of the car, those costs get to the point where it is less expensive to purchase a new car. It is fiscally irresponsible to bankrupt this country in order to attempt to extend life expectancies on the margin. It becomes an economic decision over how to allocate our health care resources.
One constructive way of doing this is to establish some level of care we can afford for those that are approaching the end of their life expectancies. For example, perhaps we spend 60% on a person at their life expectancy relative to a 21 year old. Clearly the math can be made to work any number of ways, but this is one method of balancing our health care resources. Because we are discussing public funds, it IS absolutely necessary to make sure we are getting the best return possible.
Unless "end of life" care is addressed, everyone is just wasting their time.
Labels: Health Care Reform, Health Care Spending
