Lessons Learned

Last week I analyzed the National Health Service of the United Kingdom and both identified the pros and the cons of the system. As our government comes closer and closer to forming a bill, what can they learn from the pros and cons of the NHS and maybe adopt? Well some would argue that the NHS has really nothing good to offer the United States (cough …cough the GOP) but is that really true?? Based on reports from the World Health Organization (click here for full report) the United Kingdom per capita spending on health is three times less that the per capita of the United States. Even though they pay less, they provide the same amount of doctors, nurses and services. Therefore what can the US learn and possibly benefit from the UK system?
One lesson the US can learn from the NHS is the system’s ability to pay much less per person than the American system while still guaranteeing coverage to all its citizens. By being able to provide insurance to the entire population (either with a single payer or public option) cost per capita can decrease. The United States is known for having large gaps in its health insurance coverage which contributes to the high per capital cost. An additional ability that the United States (and its people) can benefit from is having no limit on the amount of health care treatment provided. In the United States, time and time again we heard the stories of terminally ill people being denied coverage or dropped by their insurers since they reached their coverage limit. This is one of the major concerns that people have with the health care system in America and one major pro about the UK that should be included in the reform.

Although I do see some ways in which we can learn and benefit from the pros of the NHS, we can also learn from its problems. It is clear that this country is not ready or willing to have a single-payer system as the UK since they believe it will cause long waiting times for medical assistance and inadequate care and treatment. Although these cons are subjective, the US can adopt some aspects of the single-payer system and add them to the current system and meet half way. What I mean by meeting half way is that the US should consider something like a public option meaning an option offered to citizens that is government controlled. By having an option to citizens that is low in cost and coverage, we may be able to keep all the good aspects that work in the NHS and apply them to our health care system. Therefore if a citizen is worried about having to wait sometime for a general surgery they may chose to have private insurance. If a citizen does not have the adequate funds to have private insurance or just lost their coverage as a result of losing their job then they will be able to be covered under the public option. So by having some citizens in the private sector and others in the public both systems will be balanced and waiting lines can be less of a problem since the population will be divided between the two.

The NHS provides citizens with great care at a low price and the US should consider attaining some of these great aspects by adopting something like a public option, which provides the good aspects while not adopting the entire single-payer system.