With universal health care once again before the legislature of the state of California, we need to ask how we can justify being the only industrial nation that denies this basic assistance to its residents.
Or worse – so entangles it in an insurance bureaucracy, that life-or-death decisions must be made on the basis of available coverage.
Every vehicle collision or violent crime that you read about in newspaper headlines carries a lingering financial toll. People submit announcements on a recurring basis about fundraisers or bank accounts to assist these families in need.
Even when what is at stake is not life or death, there is still the urgent matter of having access to routine care. Medi-Cal is eliminating dental, vision and podiatry services effective July 1, 2009, for all of its adult clients. This, to me, is morally reprehensible and it needs to be immediately reversed.
Senate Bill 810, authored by State Senator Mark Leno, would establish universal health care in California. Through shared responsibility, everybody would pay something in and everybody would get health care. The only cost to the state would be what it is already paying.
This would be the same sort of social contract that we already have in place to fund public schools and fire departments. Even though we may never need the services that these institutions provide, we all benefit indirectly from the investments we are willing to make in our society at large.
Local governments have already documented significant potential savings under universal health care. We need to make clear to our elected officials that to deny universal health care is fiscally irresponsible – which is perhaps the only standard of conduct that will carry any weight with them.
We also must eliminate the impenetrable bureaucracy that frequently impedes care. As a person with Asperger syndrome (AS), I simultaneously identify myself as a person who has an autism spectrum disorder. Even though AS is a milepost on the autism continuum, it doesn”t possess the same clout with my insurance policy that the term “autism” has.
Treatments for autism fall under a wide variety of categories, only some of which qualify as “medical.” Insurance companies can pick and choose which treatments they are willing to cover – rather than what would best be suitable for each distinct, unique individual.
This situation would be so much easier under single-payer universal care. No matter in what category an intervention fell – mental health, medical, vision, you name it – it should be covered by universal care.
I”ve observed a similar situation in matters of preventive care. Even though they are less expensive than treating a chronic illness later on, “wellness” or preventive measures must too-often be paid for out of pocket.
Our current health care system places an inexcusable level of power in the hands of insurance companies instead of empowering the providers of care. But this is our opportunity to demand systemic change.
If you, like me, have ever been frustrated by the bureaucratic whims of an insurance carrier, please consider expressing your support for SB 810 and for its federal counterparts, HR 676 and S 703. Contact your elected representatives at the state and federal level and demand that they support universal comprehensive care.
For more information about SB 810, visit www.healthcareforall.org/sb810.html. To follow the bill”s progress through the State Senate and Assembly, visit www.leginfo.ca.gov/.
Cynthia Parkhill is the focus pages editor for the record-Bee and editor of the Clear Lake Observer?American. She can be contacted at ObserverAmerican@gmail.com or 263-5636 ext. 28.
