ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> The Volokh Conspiracy

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: The Volokh Conspiracy

Putting Lipstick on the Health-Reform Pig:

By Todd Zywicki

ADVERTISEMENTS

An interesting article in the Chronicle of Higher Education (I?m not sure if it is subscriber-only) raises some excellent points about the health-reform legislation that hadn?t really occurred to me previously.  One point that I should have thought of myself but didn?t occur to me is the peculiar incentives created by the mandate to cover preexisting conditions:

I guess one could say that the best thing about the current bill is that it allows individuals and families to opt out of insurance coverage until they need it. Since insurance companies would not be allowed to deny coverage based on preexisting conditions, but individuals and families will be penalized only at the rate of only 2.5 percent of their annual income if they do not have insurance, it makes sense for families earning under around $500,000 per year to forego insurance coverage until they get sick. Clearly insurance coverage costs most middle-class families far more that 2.5 percent of their annual income, so the current bill serves as a disincentive to purchase insurance. Bravo, Mr. President!

I should note that her opening and closing sentences in this passage although seemingly facetious are not entirely so, in that elsewhere in the article she discusses how the current version of health insurance encourages overuse of the medical system, overuse of the most expensive aspects of the medical system particularly, and that this high usage level provides no demonstrable increase in health.

A review of data for people over 65, all of whom have health insurance, shows that when they have access to more care, they endure more medical visits and procedures, which costs more money, but does not necessarily lead to improved outcomes.  The folks at Dartmouth have been studying this for years, and their data shows that having access to more specialists and medical facilities increases Medicare costs, but does not improve outcomes. I?d encourage you to read Shannon Brownlee?s insightful book, Overtreated: Why Too Much Medical Treatment is Making us Sicker and Poorer, to understand how overtreatment is costing us more money, but not improving health-care outcomes.

She also calls for tort reform for the medical malpractice system and reforms to align patient and doctor incentives more closely to making more cost-effective choice treatments.


Copyright © 2010
This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only.
The use of this feed on other websites breaches copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it makes the page you are viewing an infringement of the copyright. (Digital Fingerprint:
)

Full post as published by The Volokh Conspiracy on March 10, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 11/07/26 03:33:30)