The Philosophical Problems
A previous post pointed out that Americans expect perfection in doctors, and often times if perfection is not achieved, a lawsuit is served. This seems to stem from our modern philosophical idea of healthcare, something that has yet to be addressed in any bills or debates on TV.
The issue of drugs and drug costs discussed in the previous post is illuminating in this regards. It is a natural human desire to find an easy way to solve a problem, that’s the goal of most technology and progress. But modern society doesn’t just look for solutions that make sense, instead we look for solutions that are convenient. Just look at the evolution of most devices we use in our modern life – we’ve gone from a mechanical lawnmower that used human power, to a engine powered mower, to riding mowers that have cupholders. Now mowing the lawn is extremely convenient. This is the way modern life works across the board, from coffee machines to razors to, most alarmingly, healthcare.
Modern society has elevated the cure-all to the level of science, and we’ve convinced ourselves that with science, we can live however we’d like. Part of this means we look to drugs to solve ailments conveniently. Most Americans with high blood pressure could eat a little better, exercise a little more and be fine – but it is much more convenient to take this exciting new drug that reduces blood pressure without the lifestyle changes.
The problem with this thinking is that ailments and illnesses become separated from the way we live – each one is something to be dealt with when it arises (with SCIENCE!) and meanwhile the root issue – an overall unhealthy lifestyle – is never addressed. PSA’s and certain observers have of course been saying this for years, but in the specific context of our healthcare system, there is no overall attempt to defeat this fragmented philosophy of health. When we go to the doctor and they find a problem with us, they are rewarded by running a series of tests, prescribing the necessary drugs, and sending us on our way. The insurance company dutifully covers everything because that’s what we pay them to do. But our health, when viewed from an overall lifestyle perspective, does not improve, and the effects later on might be harrowing.
Is this a problem with the healthcare system? Yes and no. It is, as my riding lawn mower example shows, more a pervasive societal philosophy that our technological and scientific advancements have given us the ability to have convenience above all else. But the healthcare system only reinforces this philosophy, and in doing so increases the costs to consumers and further alienates those who cannot participate in the system (the uninsured).
I mention all this because the built in assumption of the healthcare debate is “because we can, we should.” Healthcare is a very sensitive subject, and any talk of limiting its availability seems horrific (see: fears about “death panels”), but the philosophy of excess and convenience we have today has a very real and very steep cost, and when we discuss its availability and how to fix this system, we either have to crown convenience king, at the sacrifice of the cost-cutting, or as a country we have to be willing to sacrifice on certain things to be able to afford the necessary things (e.g. sacrifice on drugs that replace lifestyle changes, in order to afford life-saving cancer treatments for everyone). So in the next post, we’ll look at some potential solutions that make sense to me.