Is health insurance immoral?

Yellow_Fern

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I don't approve of that either. As far as I'm concerned, the only things to which access should be based on wealth are life's luxuries; Necessities for living should be universally accessible and backed by public funding.

The problem is that we cant draw a line on what is luxury. The HSE does a lot more than basic health, from sex changes to knee replacements.

Sean.3516

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I don't approve of that either. As far as I'm concerned, the only things to which access should be based on wealth are life's luxuries;

Why do you think that good health isn’t a luxury or a privilege regardless of the economic status of the person? There is no a priori reason why a person should be in good health or bad health. Health isn’t just a right that automatically exists unless someone takes it away. It’s not like the right to life or the right to free speech for example.

Lots of factors determine health and many of them are under our direct control such as the food we eat and our habits. The medical care we receive also factors into our health. Medical care only exists as the product of labour just like food does. Why should we treat these two things differently? Rather than have the state manage medical care allow the people who privately produce healthcare to compete and the cost would decrease substantially just like any other product.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Necessities for living should be universally accessible and backed by public funding.

The state has a responsibility not to kill you. It shouldn’t have a responsibility to keep you alive. If it did, we would ban cars, cigarettes, alcohol and anything that leads to excess death in this country. We would fine people for not wearing sun cream.

Sean.3516

I don’t think health insurance is immoral but I don’t think it’s the best way to run the healthcare industry.

The purpose of insurance should be to cover massive, sudden and unexpected medical costs.

But if I have a cold or a flu or I want to get a boil lanced, I should just be able to shop around until I can find the best price and doctors should be upfront about the costs. The idea that my insurance company needs to manage that process for me is absurd.

Naos

Urethral Buttercup wrote: »

Is private health insurance immoral? Yes, absolutely. In principle, everyone should receive the same level of care regardless of wealth. Everyone should contribute to the health care system through taxes and that should be the end of it.

Everyone should receive the same level of care.
Everyone should contribute to the health care system through taxes.

Not everyone does contribute to the health care system through taxes.
Not everyone should receive the same level of care?

sheep26

Dorakman wrote: »

I hear a lot of people harp on about the 2 tier health system. How is private practice coexisting with public healthcare such a bad thing?

I think health insurance is very helpful especially when you have emergency or not expecting it

Wanderer78

sheep26 wrote:

I think health insurance is very helpful especially when you have emergency or not expecting it

Its introduction has caused complications though, of which we don’t know how to resolve

ExMachina1000

My health insurance costs around 25 euro per week.

That's less that two packets of cigarettes or 5 pints of Diageo.

People prioritize differently

I already help fund the public healthcare system through my tax. I also pay for my own private healthcare.

I earn 44k a year (ote)

I pay enough

Wanderer78

ExMachina1000 wrote:

I already help fund the public healthcare system through my tax. I also pay for my own private healthcare.

The introduction of private insurance into the market is undermining the public service, but I will agree, the average worker is virtually tapped out now with taxation

ExMachina1000

Wanderer78 wrote: »

The introduction of private insurance into the market is undermining the public service, but I will agree, the average worker is virtually tapped out now with taxation

If I go to for example Santry sports clinic because i need a knee surgery. I'm not using any public service. Me going to Santry is leaving a space free on the public system for someone else.

How the hse is ran and how it operates isn't my fault. Because I have private care I'm not to be scapegoated for hse inefficiency. Its nothing to do with me basically.

Hse needs an overall.

My salary is average. I have to miss out on other things to afford health insurance. I have a few medical issues too. The private system isn't wonderful either. I was recently quoted 1200 for a full length MRI of my spine. Insurance would only cover my neck.

That's the level of cover I can afford. If I had a better policy it would all be covered.
Its definitely a 4 or 5 tier system.

There are more than 1 million people who dont pay income tax at all but receive free healthcare in the public system

Invidious

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

One's wealth should have absolutely no bearing on the quality of healthcare one can access.

So if a multi-millionaire actress can afford breast implants, facelift, tummy tuck, and lip augmentation, those same procedures should be available for free to everyone on the dole?

Wanderer78

ExMachina1000 wrote:

Hse needs an overall.

Health systems are highly complex, there will always be inefficiencies but these should always be worked on to reduce their effectiveness, the private sector to has inefficiencies, which are rarely spoken of, prioritisation of private patients within our current system is undermining our public system, this will not be easy to resolve

ExMachina1000

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Health systems are highly complex, there will always be inefficiencies but these should always be worked on to reduce their effectiveness, the private sector to has inefficiencies, which are rarely spoken of, prioritisation of private patients within our current system is undermining our public system, this will not be easy to resolve

It's not prioritisation. It's a different system. A different building. Different doctors in some cases.

Like going into a garage and trying to get a repair done. The expensive dealership can do it next week but the small independent cant do it for a month.
Different business/company/organisation.

Hse got 16 billion of a budget last year.

Invidious

Wanderer78 wrote: »

... prioritisation of private patients within our current system is undermining our public system ...

The public system is undermining itself. Somehow we can spend €16 billion a year on the HSE, and yet have more than 667,000 on hospital waiting lists.

To put it in perspective, that's about 15% of the population on waiting lists.

Private health insurance is not to blame for the dysfunctional mess that is the HSE.

Wanderer78

ExMachina1000 wrote:

It's not prioritisation. It's a different system. A different building. Different doctors in some cases.

Its not a different system, all hospitals are interlinked, so to are the public and private systems, public patients are sent to that hospital also, private patients are prioritised, which in effect undermines the public system, it's a mess in which I maybe be unresolve able. One of the main inefficiencies of the private system would be its overall extraction of public money from the system, I.e. your taxes

Wanderer78

Invidious wrote:

Private health insurance is not to blame for the dysfunctional mess that is the HSE.

Again, health systems are highly complex, both public and private entities have inefficiencies, but the inefficiencies of the private entity are rarely spoken of, mainly wealth extraction

Invidious

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Again, health systems are highly complex, both public and private entities have inefficiencies, but the inefficiencies of the private entity are rarely spoken of, mainly wealth extraction

Abolish the private health care system, close the private hospitals, and see what happens — even longer waiting lists and even more inefficiencies.

The private system is propping up the public system, not extracting wealth from it.

In any case, we can't stop people from accessing private health care just by banning it. Tens of thousands of Canadians fly to the US and other countries for treatment each year due to the inefficiencies in their single-payer healthcare system.

Wanderer78

Invidious wrote: »

Abolish the private health care system, close the private hospitals, and see what happens — even longer waiting lists and even more inefficiencies.

The private system is propping up the public system, not extracting wealth from it.

In any case, we can't stop people from accessing private health care just by banning it. Tens of thousands of Canadians fly to the US and other countries for treatment each year due to the inefficiencies in their single-payer healthcare system.

who said anything about abolishing anything! a major shift towards either full privatization or public ownership may in fact cause further destabilization and serious problems

so what you re saying is, the private health insurance industry is a not for profit sector?

again, whos talking about stopping people from using private health care? how many americans have little or no health care cover, baring in mind, their largely privatized system?

private sector thinking regarding design of organisation structures cannot be simply transplanted into highly complex systems such as health care systems. this virus is exposing these failures in most countries, the most obvious being the more privatized countries, america etc. private sector industries utilize methods to minimize so called waste, this waste is typically classed as 'inefficiencies', typical language used in such activities would be 'streamlining' etc. we have 'streamlined' our health systems so much, that when this virus came a long, we simply didnt have capacity within our health care systems to fully absorb this rapid increase in demand, we had to effectively close down our economies in order to deal with it. efficient, i think not!

Gregor Samsa

I’ve no problem with private hospitals for those who want to pay, where I do have a big problem is with public hospitals charging for (semi) private care, but providing the exact same care as public.

My mum was in hospital for a few months years ago. She had VHI. She was in the same room in the same ward, which the same consultant, doctors and nurses for the entire time. When we got the bill (that VHI paid) for over €200,000, we saw that some nights were changed at the low public rate, some at the much higher semi-private rate.

What the hospital had done was in quiet times, they moved one bed out of the room, and replaced it with a desk. With 5 beds in the room, it magically became semi-private, and they could charge the insurance companies the much higher rate. When they were busy again, the desk disappeared and was replaced with a bed again, and with 6 beds it magically became public. Same care, same staff, same food, nothing changed for the patients at all, yet it netted thousands for the hospital at the expense of all of our health insurance premiums.

In any other field, it would be outlawed for the scam it is, but it’s the foundation on how the health system here works.

Wanderer78

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I’ve no problem with private hospitals for those who want to pay, where I do have a big problem is with public hospitals charging for (semi) private care, but providing the exact same care as public.

My mum was in hospital for a few months years ago. She had VHI. She was in the same room in the same ward, which the same consultant, doctors and nurses for the entire time. When we got the bill (that VHI paid) for over €200,000, we saw that some nights were changed at the low public rate, some at the much higher semi-private rate.

What the hospital had done was in quiet times, they moved one bed out of the room, and replaced it with a desk. With 5 beds in the room, it magically became semi-private, and they could charge the insurance companies the much higher rate. When they were busy again, the desk disappeared and was replaced with a bed again, and with 6 beds it magically became public. Same care, same staff, same food, nothing changed for the patients at all, yet it netted thousands for the hospital at the expense of all of our health insurance premiums.

In any other field, it would be outlawed for the scam it is, but it’s the foundation on how the health system here works.

but is it really working?

dvdman1

The whole sysyem needs to be insurance based...insurance should be mandatory...payments should be relative to income earned...any shortfall in the system should be propped up by additional taxes.
The current system is woefully inefficient, expensive and only delivers to employeees working in it.

Wanderer78

dvdman1 wrote: »

The whole sysyem needs to be insurance based...insurance should be mandatory...payments should be relative to income earned...any shortfall in the system should be propped up by additional taxes.
The current system is woefully inefficient, expensive and only delivers to employeees working in it.

is this working in countries such as america?

jimmycrackcorm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

The introduction of private insurance into the market is undermining the public service

You can't state that with certainty. You're imagining that private healthcare consultants would happily fall in line with the public system.
If that were the case then they'd be doing that for the love of their fellow human beings already.
It's such simplistic communist thinking that we're all so benevolent. It does work in Cuba though, as long as you can stop people leaving.

Nothing stopping anyone from having private insurance though, it's just that people who generally complain about not being able to afford it prefer spending the money on alcohol and ciggies instead.

jimmycrackcorm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

is this working in countries such as america?

Agree with that. The American system is ridiculous. But perhaps offer social welfare recipients reduced direct payments in return for subsidized insurable healthcare. But I'd bet they'll take the cash.

Wanderer78

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

You can't state that with certainty. You're imagining that private healthcare consultants would happily fall in line with the public system.
If that were the case then they'd be doing that for the love of their fellow human beings already.
It's such simplistic communist thinking that we're all so benevolent. It does work in Cuba though, as long as you can stop people leaving.

Nothing stopping anyone from having private insurance though, it's just that people who generally complain about not being able to afford it prefer spending the money on alcohol and ciggies instead.

oh ffs, communist bollocksology! joe Stiglitz has done plenty of research on this, showing that the typical outcome of introducing private health insurance is an increase in administration as the private entity tries to force the prioritization of its customers etc

maybe those that prioritize these highly addictive substances have addiction issues!

Wanderer78

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Agree with that. The American system is ridiculous. But perhaps offer social welfare recipients reduced direct payments in return for subsidized insurable healthcare. But I'd bet they'll take the cash.

is social welfare enough to survive on?

jimmycrackcorm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

oh ffs, communist bollocksology! joe Stiglitz has done plenty of research on this, showing that the typical outcome of introducing private health insurance is an increase in administration as the private entity tries to force the prioritization of its customers etc

maybe those that prioritize these highly addictive substances have addiction issues!

I don't think any one has suggested that it problem with private health insurance in Ireland is down to administration.
In contrast, everyone agrees that the HSE is drowning in administration because the unions prevent that being reformed.


As for communist commission bolloxology, can you explain how, given the shortage of consultants in the public system can be fixed by removing private healthcare consultants. Who is going to replace the money spent on private healthcare when people like me who have private insurance aren't going to donate it?. Nor are the many foreign consultants we have here going to happily take pay cuts to work in the public system instead of moving to more lucrative earnings in other countries.

There was a huge backlash by consultants when the state took over the private system temporarily. Fortunately it's read only temporarily otherwise we'd have seen a drain.

Stilglitz studies are based on the US model because they don't have an effective public sister to compete with. Our private system / UK isn't comparable.

And maybe they're isn't too much working with prioritization when that prioritization in our case is choosing health insurance vs nights out in the pub.

Why not tell us how you think a totally public system will work when it's clear people work primarily for monetary reward

jimmycrackcorm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

is social welfare enough to survive on?

Seemingly so, because we have an entitlement culture. I think we have few instances of poverty. It's more like kids having a PS3 instead of a PS4 like their friends.

dvdman1

dvdman1 wrote: »

The whole sysyem needs to be insurance based...insurance should be mandatory...payments should be relative to income earned...any shortfall in the system should be propped up by additional taxes.
The current system is woefully inefficient, expensive and only delivers to employeees working in it.

So you'd like a system that has routinely proven to be (by far) the worst healthcare system in the developed world?

Yellow_Fern

Wanderer78 wrote: »

is this working in countries such as america?

What the poster says sounds more like central europe then the US. In the US its not means tested. these central european systems work better then the NHS stye systems.

Strumms

mikhail wrote: »

I have no problem with private healthcare and private health insurance so long as the public system provides a good baseline cover. The ****e US system can't be allowed creep in.

It’s being allowed to creep in. In my experience in hospital.. Public ‘baseline’ is forever being minimized and available treatments eroded... unless you have insurance.