U.S. medicine
What is wrong with American medicine? Absolutely nothing — if you can afford it.
Affluent Americans get great care for cancer, heart ailments and other issues. But there are others who must sell the family home, go into bankruptcy or do without because of the expense of care.
Obamacare seems to be a disaster. So what are alternatives?
Why not have the government supply disaster coverage to all? It will require more tax dollars, but our health insurance premiums should be less.
Congress should strike a grand bargain and curtail medical malpractice (give a little, Dems) and allow meaningful drug competition (give a little, GOP). Nurses and pharmacists can administer much day-to-day care under the umbrella of a medical doctor.
Medicaid needs to be fully funded to this level of care (tax dollars required). Despite political rhetoric, a person cannot get services without paying for them.
Such a plan does not throw the baby out with the bathwater. The hard work and innovation of USA medicine must continue. Real savings will occur over years as more and more care is delivered through RNs and coordinated via home computers.
Let’s celebrate what is good while helping those who are at the margin of society.
— William H. Baker, Oak Park
Empty promises
Add another entry to the list of all-time whoppers: “The check is in the mail.” “I’ll respect you in the morning.” “You can keep your health insurance.”
— Pete Comps, Hampshire
Fixing Obamacare
Several Democrats in Congress have proposed a variety of ideas for fixing Obamacare. A useful analogy would be a car whose body panels are rusting out, the heat and air conditioning no longer work, and the electrical system is malfunctioning. In rapid succession the owner learns that it needs new brakes, a new engine and a new transmission. It is possible to repair this car, but the effort and expense will be considerable.
But does that make sense?
Or would it be better to send the old car to the junk yard and buy another one?
That’s where we are with Obamacare!
— Michael F. Becker, Oswego
Unsustainable Obamacare
Your Oct. 31 editorial “Beyond Obamacare; How to replace an unfolding disaster with a superior alternative” is spot-on. I fall into the category of consumers you describe: I am facing a 25 percent increase in insurance costs (premiums plus deductible), effective Jan. 1. As a relatively healthy person, I have considered forgoing insurance altogether to avoid the $6,000 deductible (up from $1,300) and instead pay the penalty.
Your editorial states: “People who don’t qualify for federal subsidies to help pay their insurance coverage face a choice: Pay higher premiums and deductibles, or go without and pay the modest penalty — with the assurance that if illness strikes, they can’t be denied coverage later. It’s easy to see why people in good health would take that limited risk. But if too many young or healthy Americans opt not to buy insurance, Obamacare costs will grow exponentially, taxpayers will bleed and the entitlement scheme will collapse into insolvency.”
I was in favor of Obamacare in the early stages, but I now see that it is unsustainable in the long run because of the perverse incentives that encourage some people to opt out. We must reform the Affordable Care Act as you outlined in your editorial; the technological problems with the website are just the tip of the iceberg.
— Sharon Kristjanson, Winnetka
Costs of illegal drugs
I agree wholeheartedly with a recent letter to the editor sharing some very solid arguments for the legalization not just of marijuana but of all street drugs.
A big part of the argument in favor of legalization is economic.
Here is just a partial list of taxes and fees that we are missing out on by keeping drug trafficking illegal:
* Import tariffs.
* Sales taxes.
* Sumptuary taxes (as one would pay on a pack of cigarettes or a pint of whiskey).
* Licenses (like those displayed by liquor and tobacco merchants).
* Income taxes.
* Payroll (Social Security and Medicare) taxes.
* Federally mandated unemployment insurance.
Indeed, the only times society at large reaps any money from drug traffickers are the sales taxes collected on big ticket items drug dealers buy with the tax-free millions they are raking in, or when Hollywood actors pay their income taxes after having played the role of a drug kingpin.
And the costs of the drug trade to society are astronomical: the innocents wounded or outright killed during turf wars, the murder and mayhem on every street corner, the prisons overflowing with gang members, the missed opportunities of our nation’s youth. How do you even begin to place a dollar figure on all that?
— Elizabeth Bloom Albert, Highland Park
Under the influence
Medical marijuana, on its way to being legal in Illinois, is not only a federal crime, it is also an additional hazard on our roadways. Drivers under the influence of cannabis are tested for sobriety by police officials in the same way drunken drivers would be tested — because the influence of this drug impairs motor skills and judgment.
By putting marijuana in the hands of sick people who need pain relief and use the drug responsibly, we are providing improved pain management — while at the same time providing opportunities for this drug to fall, all too conveniently, into the wrong hands of friends, offspring or people faking illnesses. And for those legitimately using the drug, there is no guarantee that it will be used in the privacy of one’s home.
Currently we have dangers on our roadways of people under the influence of alcohol, psycho-pharmaceuticals and cellphones. Just add one more dangerous impairment to the list and watch for more traffic accidents and fatalities.
— Mel Novit, Morton Grove
Preparing for baby
This is in response to “Pregnant women tend to tend to their nests; Canadian study finds that a woman’s desire to choose and prepare home for baby is not lore, rather a natural instinct” (Chicagoland Health and family, Nov. 6). I find it amazing that anyone would conclude that tidying up one’s home before the birth of a child is an instinctual form of nest-building specific to women.
A baby places complex new demands on a family. Therefore, it is entirely rational to anticipate these demands and organize one’s household accordingly.
Especially if a woman has some parental leave before her baby arrives, that’s an ideal time to thoughtfully prepare for the baby’s arrival. And I expect that many men anticipating fatherhood share this organizing task with their wives.
— Alice H. Eagly, professor of psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston
