UK's Lousy Healthcare May Be Exported to America

Plans for overhauling America's healthcare are making the rounds in Washington.  Both political parties are sending signals about a new direction.  In this political season, the dialogue appears to be headed toward a government-run plan or at the very least intrusive federal oversight of healthcare.

Those trumpeting Medicare for All are pointing to models in other countries as a cure all for what ails America's healthcare system.  Proponents want a national system that covers every individual in the country.  Absolutely free.  Run by bureaucrats in Washington rather than by doctors and patients.

By dangling the word "free" in the face of Americans, champions of the system are counting on voters signing on without any facts about the consequences for preserving quality healthcare. The clever ruse might work unless Americans are educated about the chilling experience of others.

If voters want a preview of nationalized healthcare, they need look no further than the United Kingdom. Our neighbors across the pond receive free or heavily subsidized healthcare. That care is provided by the government-run, centralized National Health Service (NHS.)

The NHS, funded by taxpayers, rules every aspect of health care.  It dictates conditions of work, employment, hours, pay, drugs and authorizes treatments.  The NHS bureaucracy even prescribes doctors' training. As a result, doctors are treated more like production workers than professionals.

Ironically, American proponents often cite Britain as an example of how free government provided healthcare benefits the public. These supporters are hoping no one bothers to examine the quality of care in the U.K.  In a word, it is lousy.  Numerous studies have documented that fact.

A Patients Association report issued in the U.K. found that from 2002 to 2008 about one million patients suffered "neglectful, demeaning, painful and sometimes downright cruel" treatment.  The appalling level of care was responsible for up to 1,200 patients dying in a single year.

Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders often bellows that Americans will die unless health care is overseen by the government. He cites the NHS as a model, among others, to be imitated. News Flash Mr. Sanders.  People actually die from health care in the U.K.

In 2012, the British Medical Journal published the results of two studies conducted by the New York-based Commonwealth Fund,  In a review of healthcare systems in 14 advanced countries, the NHS was rated the worst on several major categories.

The British system was ranked dead last for five-year survival rates on cervical, breast and colon cancers. It was the worst for 30-day mortality rates after admission to a hospital for either hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke.  On the bright side, patients did not have to pay for miserable care.

Another report in 2013 cited long waits for non-emergency visits to family doctors, known as general practitioners. Many GPs are booked months in advance.  Patients can see the doctors promptly if that call and report a medical emergency.  But GPs are limited to the number of emergency appointments.

There is a backlog of patients waiting for surgeries, which can be postponed for lack of a piece of medical equipment.  Elective surgery is rare, but in those cases patients must wait years to be seen by a specialist.  Americans spoiled by surgery-on-demand would be horrified by this standard of care.

Like the ill-fated Obamacare plan, the promise of the NHS was to eliminate emergency room visits through national healthcare coverage. However, hospital emergency room visits are growing in Britain because most general practitioners do not work after hours under the NHS employment rules.

Healthcare has not improved since the 2013 review.  The latest summary covering July to September of 2018 found emergency visits still rising by 1,000 per day.  Waiting times have increased and more than 100,000 vacancies exist for doctors and nurses. This scenario leads to more healthcare rationing.

In Britain the result is a two-tier system.  Those who can afford paying for care out of their own pockets visit private physicians, receive care in private hospitals and buy private health insurance. Their level of healthcare is far superior to that of the average Brit.  Is that what Americans want?

British private care is more costly than even the United States.  An appointment with a general practitioner costs $105 for 15 minutes.  An hour consultation runs $350.  Those in America backing national health schemes know full well the same two-tier system will be the result of their scheme.

On a personal note, your journalist has first-hand knowledge of the U.K. system, having resided in London.  But mine predates that of my niece who resided in London where she birthed two children in the British healthcare system. Her cringe-worthy details should frighten any female.

She never saw an OBGYN.  She was allowed only two sonograms.  She never saw a doctor because she was not considered high risk.  Her baby was delivered by a mid-wife.  She had to insist on admission to a hospital to get an epidural because the normal birthing centers do not offer the drug.

Traveling and living outside the U.S. have opened my eyes to how fortunate Americans are to have the most modern and technologically superior healthcare system.  Too bad more Americans have not lived abroad.  While our system has flaws, it remains the world's best.

The worry is that voters will react only to the the seduction of "free" when they consider politicians' proposals.  Cost is a legitimate concern, but improving healthcare quality should be the priority of any changes. Let's hope voters do their own due diligence rather than relying on Utopian promises.