I was thinking about my two pregnancies this morning, and I’ll tell you why that’s relevant to this blog if you’ll bear with me for a paragraph or five.
First, there’s AG.
My pregnancy with her in 1998 was of the Oh, NO. I can’t be pregnant. Not PREGNANT variety. One month out of college, broke because the soon-to-be Mr. Asthma Mom and I both paid for school with the usual juggle of student loans, scholarships, and multiple part-time jobs. Plus, when I took that home pregnancy test? I lacked health insurance. At 22, I no longer qualified under my father’s retired military benefits and in the few weeks since my graduation, hadn’t yet found a job with benefits.
So you can picture it, I’m sure. No money, no health care, no real stability. My parents were focused on their hostile separation and divorce, and his lived in Texas. In the interest of finding steady work before my stomach started to pop out and employers would calculate how months they could get out of me before I gave birth, I took a glorified secretary job at a local radio station. Lowly wages and boring work, but hey–we paid the rent on time and could buy food, at least.
However, I never did get health insurance until the fifth month of my pregnancy, a result of waiting periods for both our jobs and the beyond-broken system. Medicaid failed us during my first trimester because our combined pay just creeped over the poverty limit at the same time our college bills, rent, and utilities left no money for out-of-pocket appointments without coverage.
In a word, I’d call that first pregnancy stressful.
Now, jump ahead a couple years. Despite our very dubious beginning, our family is more or less stable. I’m 25 and pregnant with my second daughter. AG is a two year-old asthmatic, and we all have health insurance. We have actually managed to buy our first home, and Mr. Asthma Mom’s work is steady enough that I’ve just left my full-time job to stay home with AG for a few years. We still don’t have much money and never, for example, get to go on vacation, but we do have a more secure footing and I’m grateful to spend my daughter’s early years with her.
And also? We actually planned this pregnancy, and that feels worlds easier, too. Not only are my mind and heart in a place that’s less shell-shocked (like AG’s pregnancy) and more already-buckled-in-and-ready-to-amp-up-the-speed, but all the tangible things are in place, too. We already have the crib, the carseat, the clothes, and the baby toys as AG has outgrown them. This pregnancy makes for a much smoother journey.
Here’s the point I’m trying to make: even though my life pretty much aligns with this study, I greet the news with a big, resounding
Meh.
We already know that stress = health risks, no? And further, while the pregnancy books don’t go into any great detail, we know stress affects babies, too.
But here’s the bigger reason behind my indifference. Suppose researchers build on this study, keep digging and reviewing and find enough evidence to take all the conditional words like might and suggest out of the results to say, If you’re under lots of stress then your baby is more likely to have asthma and/or allergies.
Then what?
Obstetricians already tell expectant moms to keep the stress down and get lots of sleep, and those personal measures only work to a certain point, don’t they? For a shockingly high number of U.S. women, everyday stresses don’t even come close to some of the realities of their lives:
Substandard health care or (in my case back then) no health care.
Poverty.
Inner-city crime.
Lower salaries for women.
I mostly buy into the theory that every bit of asthma information adds a little more color to the canvas. Until we get the full picture, who knows which parts will end up crucial link for a cure or a vaccine?
So, okay. Stress is bad. For lots of reasons.
Now what can we do to take some of that stress off women, give them less anxiety about the things they can’t control.
Universal health care, for example. Yeah, I know it’s not a perfect solution because there is no perfect solution. And can we get any worse than this?
I know one of favorite complaints against universal health coverage is the idea of government’s meddling in health care, and I have to wonder how many of these people have ever been denied coverage themselves. If they know the health anxiety–the stress–of the uninsured.
Going back to my own example way back when, I didn’t lack health insurance because I was lazy, unemployed, trying to milk the system, or (fill in any other assumption here):
- I was college-educated.
- I worked a full-time job.
- Medicaid wouldn’t cover me for the first trimester until my job’s insurance kicked in because of our combined income.
- I had no money for the full price of OB appointments without insurance because I was responsible and paying my bills.
- I was more than willing to pay for any insurance, but my job’s plan entailed a several-month waiting period and I had no stop-gap options available.
Pregnant, uninsured and terrified, I would have taken any health care in the interim until my job’s plan covered me, under any terms. Let’s also remember that people who have the luxury to oppose universal health care from a political, hypothetical standpoint only generally already have coverage themselves. But if they polled the high number of uninsured, stressed mothers in the U.S., they’d probably struggle to find one who doesn’t support it.
This formerly-uninsured Asthma Mom sure does.
Grass isn’t always greener on the other side. I say this because even though people like yourself say that they want or support universal health care, it doesn’t mean it works well. I have seen both sides of the system, I have only experienced one though. My husband on the otherhand has experienced both and he prefers our health care here in the United States. My husband is from Canada and when he came to the US he was amazed at how quickly tests are run and how fast it is to get appointments with specialist. If you need an MRI you have to wait….and wait… and wait until one is available. And sometimes you have to drive far away to other towns when one is available. My MIL had to wait at least 6 months for an MRI to check to see if she has MS. His sister had to wait in the hospital for 4 days to have surgery on a lung that collapsed because it was considered elective. She ran a higher risk of getting an infection from the tube in her chest because of the long wait. Did you know in a lot of countries with socialized medicine if you are not from that country and you are dying they will not treat you without payment first. It happened to a coworker of mine when he was in New Zealand for work. There are also certain things that univeral health care doesn’t cover and that is perscriptions and some medical treatments. Some cancer treatments that are proven to work here in the US aren’t covered in other contries even though they are covered here by some insurances. I have several medical conditions, and I believe if I lived in one of those countries there is no way I would be able to work with all the doctor’s appointments I go to currently and the waiting times that they have there.
There is a problem with our current health care system, but I believe sincerely that universal health care is not the answer. If you think it is then go visit a facility in another country and see for yourself.
Thanks for your comment–I welcome all opinions on both sides of the issue.
I’ve spoken to other Canadians—a reader of this blog, for example– who support that country’s system. You can read her comment about it here on this post.
“Did you know in a lot of countries with socialized medicine if you are not from that country and you are dying they will not treat you without payment first.”
No, I didn’t, actually. But I do know U.S. citizens die every day for lack of coverage, as reported in these news articles:
TampaBay.com
PennLive.com
USNews.com
There are also plenty of treatments that plans in this country don’t cover, and problems with long wait times as well. People in my state are fighting right now for health insurance plans to cover behavioral therapy for autistic children since parents often go into massive debt and take out second mortgages to pay for it out-of-pocket. And that’s just one example.
Let me repeat–I know there is no perfect plan, but I also don’t think health insurance should be a luxury, as it is for a large number of people in this country under our current system.
I could not agree more with AsthmaMom and disagree with ‘Z.’
To Z:
1. – No one said that a partial socialization of health care to make sure that US citizens – especially under-privileged children – can get health coverage is going to change what is currently covered by private insurance. In fact, the problems you are describing with MRIs were a problem here in the States as little as five years ago. I lived in a major metro area with tons of good hospitals around. When I tore the ACL in my knee, I had to hobble around on crutches for weeks waiting for my turn on an MRI. These waits were a problem of availability and expense of MRI machines. It had nothing to do with Universal Health Care versus private.
2 – I have been in other countries – plural – with socialized health care (not just knew someone who had) and having received care in those places, I can tell you that there are some drawbacks. But most arguments against are filled with the ‘applying parts to the whole’ logical fallacy. You can’t take a problem that is prevalent in Sweden but not a problem in Canada, and then take a problem in Canada that is not a problem in Sweden and then argue that both problems are a problem with all socialized health care. That’s like saying sharks are fish, gold fish are fish, therefore all fish are gold and can eat you.
3. – As far as your issue with not being able to get health care if you are not from that country – you are creating a straw man fallacy. You are creating an argument (in New Zealand you cannot receive health care if you are A) a non-citizen and B) you are dying. So your friend was dying in a New Zealand hospital and was refused care? Don’t know that I believe that. I think you are exaggerating a point and that’s fine but don’t make that stuff up. Details matter when it comes to this subject. Also, I do not pretend to know your politics on this, but isn’t one of the biggest beefs people who are against gov’t involvement in health care the fact that illegal aliens are provided heath care? So don’t worry, in our country, that won’t be a problem … or are you only against non-citizen care when that non-citizen is an American?
Look, I am all for a free market. But insurance carriers are constantly raising premiums and looking for ways to get out of paying by pricing the sick out of the market and raking premiums from the healthy. The business model for insurance centers on not actually having to provide services but to take in premiums. I have had to actually argue with my insurance customer service because they refuse to cover a medication prescribed to my child by a specialist because there was no record at the company that we had tried an over-the-counter medicine first. And the over-the-counter medicine they were pushing was 1 – proven to make patients with my daughter’s condition worse, 2 – a way to get out of paying. When did insurance carriers start presuming to know more than doctors?
Will universal health coverage solve that problem? Maybe, maybe not. But I’m not going to hold that example up and say all private health care is broken. None of your arguments hold anymore water than that.
I’m with AsthmaMom. I would take it a step further and say that making health coverage a 100% private industry hasn’t worked. It’s turned decisions that should be about patient care into decisions about dollars and cents.
I’m going to have to go with George and Wheezie on this one (mostly).
The issue isn’t so much privitized vs socialized healthcare to me. The issue is intent. Are we saying medical care is a human right and we need to provide it across the board without regard to profit, or are we saying that we want to provide it as much as possible, but never at a loss? I do not wish to see our medical care system go broke, but with clinics closing and hospitals waivering on closing their ERs, we still see insurance companies making a profit. Meanwhile, the premiums my non profit pays to the insurance company have increased by over 600% in the last 10 years. Where is the fault in the current system?
Like Asthmamom, I have been pregnant and uninsured (my husband was laid off and rehired with my new pregnancy considered a pre existing condition) and it’s difficult to find a doctor that will take payments for delivering a baby. That two month break in employment made the pregnancy a dollar and cents issue for the insurance company and something they did not have to cover.
I know there are long wait times for tests in Canada, I’ve chatted with asthmatics up there and it’s true. But the flip side of the equation is that they get the exact same inhaler I use for $24. It’s $170 here with no coverage.
I’m not advocating for an extreme makeover, but I suspect that a better healthcare systems lies somewhere between total privatization and total socialization. I like compromises!
Excellent points raised.
As a Canadian (woohoo!), who has spent the past 8 months studying in the states, I have seen first hand both sides of the argument. I have experienced medical emergencies galore, (one roommate was an undiagnosed diabetic, another broke her ankle, I had a flare up, etc. etc.)
Yes, we were all taken care of swiftly in the states, but thank God we all had insurance and lived within 25 minutes of a Canadian hospital as well.
The bills were astronomical (300 dollars for 20 minutes in my case- which I had to pay out of pocket because I didn’t understand the insurance game) My friend who broke her ankle would have had to pay thousands to get it fixed because her insurance didn’t offer 100% coverage, so she went to the Canadian hospital. My roommate with the diabetes…well, again, thank God she had major insurance because it was beyond enormous (emergency visit, 1.5 weeks in, one night in ICU).
Have I had to wait at Canadian hospitals? You bet. There is no doubt the system is failing, especially for those working in it. My mom has been a nurse for over 30 years and she can almost never take her vacation time. They are always always short staffed, and because she works in OBS, it makes for a dangerous situation at times. We also have a massive doctor shortage, so family doctors are few and far between, and often the ones we do have ignore the nobility of the profession and thoroughly interview potential patients so they can weed out the “difficult” cases.
But, have I ever been in an acute emergency and not been dealt with first? Nope. Every time I have gone to emergency with asthma issues I have been taken before almost everyone except the ambulances, because it is considered a life threatening . Even in waiting for an MRI on my knee twice, a non-emergency procedure, I never had to wait for more than 6 months. It may sound like a lot …but I understand that the people before me deserve it just as much, or if not more than me. Nobody gets ahead because they have money.
Of course, the experience varies from province to province. Amy? They don’t cover behavioural therapy for autism here either, which is tragic, because the debt families accrue is astounding.
All in all though, in my own unscientific analysis, I far prefer universal healthcare. I don’t think big business should have a right to control a basic human right, such as healthcare.
Here I was worrying that I will lose my drug coverage in December, and will have to pay out of pocket! There are worse things, I suppose.
Whew…..thanks for all the thoughtful (and thought-provoking) comments, guys. In particular, I appreciate your take on insurance companies meddling in dr. prescriptions, GandW, your take on insurance co. profits and non profits and intent, Asthmagirl, and your firsthand perspective on the Canadian AND the U.S. systems, especially in regard to emergencies, Heather.
Also, thanks for bringing up that argument against universal health care based on longer wait times for non-emergencies, Heather. That point has always struck me as saying the insureds’ desire for instant access to drs. outweighs the need for more people to have access to drs. at all.
It’s a complicated issue and although I support it, universal healthcare may prove not to be the answer. But I sure haven’t heard any better solutions out there. (No, I don’t think McCain’s tax credit plan qualifies as a solution.)