On Tuesday, America lost a lifelong champion of the under resourced.
Regardless of your political view, everyone I’ve heard who’s talked about Sen. Edward Kennedy has said he always fought for the under resourced and always worked to build compromise wherever possible to make landmark legislation happen.
Many have suggested that the entire health care debate we’re currently having would be taking a different tone and direction if Kennedy had been able to meet with his colleagues and work through the issue.
In that spirit I’d love to see us put the partisanship aside and really talk about solutions. Don’t attack the other side – or someones view. Just offer solutions.
I think we can all agree that ultimately the goal is equal access to quality health care for every American citizen.
So here are a couple questions that I’d love to get your input on…
What is the best idea(s) you’ve heard (or thought of yourself) when it comes to health care reform (in the US or worldwide)?
What solution do you think would make the biggest positive impact on the entire health care system?
There you have it. Two simple questions that can hopefully get our creative juices flowing in a direction other than name calling and angry soundbites.
And let’s try and keep the discussion civil. No attacking other ideas – let’s just share solutions.
1. Tort reform. Medicine is a practice – not an exact science. The pressure for human doctors and nurses to be perfect results in massive malpractice expenses that are not justified. Some are, I understand, but not most. The premiums are ridiculous and have caused excessive overprescription of tests and surgeries and even medications to “cover one’s tail”. In the end, the only real winners in this scenario are the attorneys.
2. Rein in the pharmaceutical companies. Pressure on the FDA to release medications before sufficient testing results in bad medications being released and all the resulting side effects – another source of massive income for attorneys. In a discussion with a rep for the manufacturer of Gardisil, I was told they have 5 years of research on the vaccine. Five years? I’m sorry, I don’t want my daughter using a vaccine with only 5 years of track record – that doesn’t provide information on long-term effects on things like childbirth. AND it is virtually never mentioned that this guards against an STD. Abstinence will also guard against that same STD.
Donna, thanks for your input! Hope we can get a number of other folks to add to the conversation.
1. Tort reform. Medicine is a practice – not an exact science. The pressure for human doctors and nurses to be perfect results in massive malpractice expenses that are not justified. Some are, I understand, but not most. The premiums are ridiculous and have caused excessive overprescription of tests and surgeries and even medications to “cover one’s tail”. In the end, the only real winners in this scenario are the attorneys.
2. Rein in the pharmaceutical companies. Pressure on the FDA to release medications before sufficient testing results in bad medications being released and all the resulting side effects – another source of massive income for attorneys. In a discussion with a rep for the manufacturer of Gardisil, I was told they have 5 years of research on the vaccine. Five years? I’m sorry, I don’t want my daughter using a vaccine with only 5 years of track record – that doesn’t provide information on long-term effects on things like childbirth. AND it is virtually never mentioned that this guards against an STD. Abstinence will also guard against that same STD.
Donna, thanks for your input! Hope we can get a number of other folks to add to the conversation.