Editor’s note: This commentary is by Jeffrey Reel, a writer/lecturer living in Lyndon Center, and general manager of Natural Provisions, in St. Johnsbury. He was previously sustainability manager at the Omega Center for Holistic Studies in Rhinebeck, New York.
[T]his is in response to John McClaughry’s book review “Overcharged for Health Care.”
I have lived in Vermont for only one year, but it seems that the Ethan Allen Institute keeps trying to find a suit that fits when it comes to the issue of health care. This is the third change of clothing within the past 12 months. Their health care proposals might be part of a cohesive plan, but they appear disjointed to me. Just recently, the institute was heralding direct primary care (which is included in Obamacare) and, before that, a draconian approach it coined “income tax-based recapture,” a concept that falls just short of hiring bounty hunters to track down citizens who can’t afford to pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars in catastrophic medical costs. Now it’s the “health care retail sector.” Let’s just hope that when the institute stops turning, it will be facing in the right direction.
McClaughry writes: “The most hopeful solution they [the authors] offer is an innovative health care retail sector. That includes astonishingly cost-effective medical tourism (to such remarkable medical complexes as Narayana Hrudayalaya in Bengeluru, India.” It is hard to grasp that the authors of the book believe that one way to cut medical costs is for Americans to go abroad for cost-effective medical care (“medical tourism”) – and for those who can obviously afford the time and the expense, given that these medical procedures will not be covered by American insurance. Alice has surely fallen into the hole. It is impossible for me to discern, in his column, the authors’ opinions from McClaughry’s, but McClaughry considers himself a libertarian, as do the authors, and he thought highly enough of the book to highlight its bright spots with the readers of VTDigger. But he cannot possibly be advocating medical tourism as a health care fix. If cost-effective, quality medical care is available overseas, perhaps we should model our medical system on theirs.
McClaughry notes, and seems to settle upon, the authors’ idea of health savings accounts “coupled with catastrophic insurance, for rewarding people for saving responsibly for their health care needs later in life.” And those millions who weren’t able to set aside money for health care needs later in life, even though they might be working two jobs just to make ends meet? I guess, by default, they are irresponsible citizens who must fend for themselves. When it comes to everyone’s right to quality health care, let’s get beyond the concepts of “reward” and “punishment” once and for all.
I often wonder why I see virtually no women writers aggressively pushing back against socialized health care. It’s almost always the male of the species. Perhaps not coincidentally, 13 of 15 members of the EAI’s advisory council are male: men of reasoning so deep that one can get lost in the labyrinth of concepts. Truth be told, the intellect simply gives voice to what resides, first and foremost, in the heart. We can create whatever health care system we want, and make it work – yes, even financially – when our collective hearts and intentions are guiding our actions. All of our institutions are artificial and “man made,” and simply reflect the depth, or absence, of compassion that fashioned them (the creation of debtors prisons versus the creation of old-age pensions). But this requires introspection, something we seem to be in short supply of these days.
