A Public Option Story: How "Socialized Medicine" Is Already Saving Lives In America

A Public Option Story:

How "Socialized Medicine" Is Already Saving Lives Right Here In the U.S.

Critics of health care reform seem eternally focused on the potential for problems, but rarely do we take the time to consider the possibility of the "best case scenario" where the public option is concerned. But we needn't tax our imaginations to see what a successful health policy would look like. Surprisingly, it seems that a successful public option already exists in America... for people with one specific diagnosis.

Jennifer Nix is the author of the article "I Love My Socialist Kidney," a first-hand look at how a government-sponsored "public option" for patients with end-stage renal disease has been saving lives for decades right here in the U.S... and how it saved hers.

The day after this country elected Barack Obama its 44th president, a doctor told me I'd inherited from my father a rare form of cystic kidney disease and that I was already in renal failure. Beyond the devastation I felt on hearing this news, and despite having health insurance, my greatest fear in those first, foggy days was one that haunts millions of Americans. I was more terrified of being dropped or denied treatment by my insurer over some minuscule technicality than I was of facing the disease.... A few weeks into my ordeal, however, I learned that my diagnosis qualified me for a little-known existing "public option," or government health insurance plan. The same program had saved my father's life, but I was frankly surprised to learn it still existed despite numerous legislative changes through the decades. Today, almost a year after my diagnosis and amid the disheartening acrimony and willful misinformation pervading our healthcare debate, I can bear witness to what constitutes "socialized medicine" in the United States....

By the 1960s, dialysis and transplantation were established as effective treatments for kidney failure, which could allow ESRD patients to live full and productive lives. With no funding for long-term, chronic dialysis, however, hospital committees decided who would live and die. These committees looked at age, complicating health concerns, psychological well-being and a patient's "social worth," but because the wealthy could afford to pay for their treatments outright, they were the most often treated, resulting in a class-driven mortality rate. The government "death panels" decried in the hyperbolic rhetoric of today's right-wing anti-healthcare reform fanatics may be imaginary, but in the 1960s and early '70s there really were death panels for ESRD patients....

Without the government stepping in to remedy a situation that the market and private business willfully ignored, both my father and I would most likely have died within a year of our diagnoses. I believe every American citizen deserves the same kind of health security. Even before I got sick, my father's story was the reason I became an activist myself during the Bush years, as I saw people's faith in government dwindling. It's why I fought so hard to get Obama elected, and why I'll be gravely disappointed if he gives in on the public option....

Click HERE to read the entire article.

 The author makes a strong point about the idea of "death panels," as the ultra neo-conservative rhetoric has labeled them. Although the myth of Social Security "death panels" in President O'bama's plan is patently false, the idea behind them is perhaps more based in reality than we would care to admit to ourselves.

Today, the specter of a "death panel" lingers over American families who receive a chronic or terminal medical diagnosis. For those who have health insurance, the stress of waiting and wondering whether their insurance will cover the high costs of treatment - or continue to cover them at all - has become in itself a part of the illness which much be treated. The same can be said for the millions of Americans who are lost somewhere in the (usually multi-year) process of applying for disability. In these situations, an insurance executive or an administrative law judge will literally make decisions of life and death - decisions which would be left in the hands of the patients and their own physicians if a public option for health insurance were available to these same patients.

So rather than pouring our national energy into figuring out ways that a policy of providing health insurance for everyone could go wrong, perhaps we have reached a point where we need to admit to ourselves that failing to provide such coverage has already cost us too much in terms of our economy, our national standing, and - most importantly - the lives of our own loved ones. Our lack of universal health coverage has already gone far wrong. It is up to us as citizens of "the world's wealthiest nation" to refuse to allow such a monumental failure of policy to continue. What we can do, as the moral and just society we want ourselves to be, we must do. What we can do to save one life, we can do to save many. We have seen the devastation caused by the lack of such a policy, and we can see how a successful policy can be run. Now it is up to us as Americans to make it work for everyone.