PROFESSIONThinking "out of the box" regarding health care coverageCommentary. By Leonard J. Marcus, PhD, and Barry C. Dorn, MD, amednews contributors. March 18, 2002. In the course of complex negotiation or problem solving, one misguided assumption often can become an obstacle to forward movement. Even if well-intended, such an assumption obscures root causes of a problem and therefore pragmatic options for its resolution. In this column, we challenge the assumption -- swirling through the access to health services debate -- that everyone in this country must ultimately receive the same health services. Though it is well-intended, we believe this assumption is a substantial impediment to expanding insurance coverage to the 40 million or so in this country who are without. For the purposes of analogy, we use the seating arrangements of a commercial airliner to clarify the distinctions proposed in our "three-basket model." Passengers on the plane are divided between first, business and coach classes. No matter the class, each passenger enjoys identical core standards of flight: safety, security, reliability and a means of passage. The first-class and business passengers receive better amenities in exchange for their higher ticket costs. For the airlines, these premium fares disproportionately cover operational costs, allowing the plane to be filled with reduced-fare economy passengers whose costs are subsidized by passengers up front. Even though back-of-the-plane passengers literally have to pass through the front cabin, one rarely hears resentment since most are content to be on board at a fraction of the price of a premium seat.
[...]
Full text of American Medical News content is available to AMA members and paid subscribers.
Copyright 2002 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
|